Fauci Gets the Giggles When Asked Why White House is Spreading Disinformation About COVID Vaccine Availability


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 13, 2022 | Sundance 

Fake News CNN’s Jake Tapper asks White House Chief Medical Advisor Anthony Fauci why the White House is sending out false information, aka ‘disinformation’, about when the COVID vaccines were available. Fauci giggles, laughs and says “I have no idea.”  WATCH:

U.S. politics has devolved into a grand pretense of a theatrical performance keeping everyone distracted from the severe damage being inflicted by the political ideologues within the Biden administration.

I guarantee you if someone were just to ask Joe Biden at a presser who his Interior Secretary or EPA Administrator were, he’d have absolutely no idea.  Biden is purposefully and completely isolated from the policies being carried out by the people running the administration.  Biden has no idea what they are doing. None.

Clueless and disconnected Joe Biden is a shallow, empty and at times explosively angry vessel of nothingness.   The entire world can see it.

Global COVID Summit Declaration IV


A Joint Statement, representing 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists to End the National Emergency, Restore Scientific Integrity, and Address Crimes Against Humanity

Robert W Malone MD, MS22 hr ago1,516104

The time is now. As most readers of this substack are now well aware, this is not just about COVID. The constitution hangs in the balance. Please help us to get these messages spread far and wide. The 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists in our organization, who are not financially conflicted and remain committed to the Hippocratic Oath, are doing our part. Now we ask that you help us to help you. We need your help.

https://globalcovidsummit.org/news/declaration-iv-restore-scientific-integrity

Alternative link


Global COVID Summit, Declaration IV

A Joint Statement, representing 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists 

To Restore Scientific Integrity

17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists Declare that the State of Medical Emergency must be lifted, Scientific integrity restored, and crimes against humanity addressed.


17,000 physicians and medical scientists declare that the state of medical emergency must be lifted, scientific integrity restored, and crimes against humanity addressed.

We, the physicians and medical scientists of the world, united through our loyalty to the Hippocratic Oath, recognize that the disastrous COVID-19 public health policies imposed on doctors and our patients are the culmination of a corrupt medical alliance of pharmaceutical, insurance, and healthcare institutions, along with the financial trusts which control them. They have infiltrated our medical system at every level, and are protected and supported by a parallel alliance of big tech, media, academics and government agencies who profited from this orchestrated catastrophe.

This corrupt alliance has compromised the integrity of our most prestigious medical societies to which we belong, generating an illusion of scientific consensus by substituting truth with propaganda. This alliance continues to advance unscientific claims by censoring data, and intimidating and firing doctors and scientists for simply publishing actual clinical results or treating their patients with proven, life-saving medicine. These catastrophic decisions came at the expense of the innocent, who are forced to suffer health damage and death caused by intentionally withholding critical and time-sensitive treatments, or as a result of coerced genetic therapy injections, which are neither safe nor effective.

The medical community has denied patients the fundamental human right to provide true informed consent for the experimental COVID-19 injections. Our patients are also blocked from obtaining the information necessary to understand risks and benefits of vaccines, and their alternatives, due to widespread censorship and propaganda spread by governments, public health officials and media. Patients continue to be subjected to forced lock-downs which harm their health, careers and children’s education, and damage social and family bonds critical to civil society. This is not a coincidence. In the book entitled “COVID-19: The Great Reset”, leadership of this alliance has clearly stated their intention is to leverage COVID-19 as an “opportunity” to reset our entire global society, culture, political structures, and economy.

Our 17,000 Global COVID Summit physicians and medical scientists represent a much larger, enlightened global medical community who refuse to be compromised, and are united and willing to risk the wrath of the corrupt medical alliance to defend the health of their patients.

The mission of the Global COVID Summit is to end this orchestrated crisis, which has been illegitimately imposed on the world, and to formally declare that the actions of this corrupt alliance constitute nothing less than crimes against humanity.

We must restore the people’s trust in medicine, which begins with free and open dialogue between physicians and medical scientists. We must restore medical rights and patient autonomy. This includes the foundational principle of the sacred doctor-patient relationship. The social need for this is decades overdue, and therefore, we the physicians of the world are compelled to take action.

After two years of scientific research, millions of patients treated, hundreds of clinical trials performed and scientific data shared, we have demonstrated and documented our success in understanding and combating COVID-19. In considering the risks versus benefits of major policy decisions, our Global COVID Summit of 17,000 physicians and medical scientists from all over the world have reached consensus on the following foundational principles:

  1. We declare and the data confirm that the COVID-19 experimental genetic therapy injections must end.
  2. We declare doctors should not be blocked from providing life-saving medical treatment.
  3. We declare the state of national emergency, which facilitates corruption and extends the pandemic, should be immediately terminated.
  4. We declare medical privacy should never again be violated, and all travel and social restrictions must cease.
  5. We declare masks are not and have never been effective protection against an airborne respiratory virus in the community setting.
  6. We declare funding and research must be established for vaccination damage, death and suffering.
  7. We declare no opportunity should be denied, including education, career, military service or medical treatment, over unwillingness to take an injection.
  8. We declare that first amendment violations and medical censorship by government, technology and media companies should cease, and the Bill of Rights be upheld.
  9. We declare that Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, Astra Zeneca, and their enablers, withheld and willfully omitted safety and effectiveness information from patients and physicians, and should be immediately indicted for fraud.
  10. We declare government and medical agencies must be held accountable.

Australia Launches Booster Shot Marketing Campaign


Armstrong Economics Blog/Vaccine Re-Posted May 13, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

The Australian government is spending millions on an ad campaign to encourage citizens to take a third COVID vaccine. Their method of marketing is quite surprising and I question who would be enticed to take the vaccine upon watching this ad. The campaign features individuals who received the two jabs — and still fell deathly ill with COVID.

You risked your life to take an experimental vaccine, twice, and STILL contracted the virus. Your symptoms were allegedly life-threatening, so the theory that the vaccine will lessen symptoms is moot here. All of that and people are still willingly taking the third vaccine. Cognitive dissonance is strong here.

Nearly 72% of Southern Australians are triple jabbed, yet the government feels it is worth spending $2 million to target that remaining portion who likely do not want another useless vaccine with known side effects. Governments across the globe were hoping we would all be mindless sheep, politely queuing each season for another immunization. Enough is enough.

FDA Limits Use of Johnson and Johnson Vaccine Due to Blood Clots


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 5, 2022 | Sundance 

The FDA has limited the use of the Johnson and Johnson COVID vaccine to only those over 18-years-old due to blood clotting issues. [Press Release Here] Johnson & Johnson’s Covid-19 vaccine is now limited to adults due to the risk of a rare blood clotting syndrome.

FDA – “Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has limited the authorized use of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine to individuals 18 years of age and older for whom other authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccines are not accessible or clinically appropriate, and to individuals 18 years of age and older who elect to receive the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine because they would otherwise not receive a COVID-19 vaccine.” (read more)

WHAT CHANGED? – “The FDA and CDC have continuously monitored for and investigated all suspected cases of TTS reported to VAERS. In an updated analysis of TTS cases following administration of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine that were reported to VAERS through March 18, 2022, the FDA and CDC have identified 60 confirmed cases, including nine fatal cases. The FDA has determined that the reporting rate of TTS is 3.23 per million doses of vaccine administered and the reporting rate of TTS deaths is 0.48 per million doses of vaccine administered.”

Senator Tim Kaine Indicates Biden $33 Billion Ukraine Spend Likely to be Packaged with Another $22 Billion COVID Money


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 1, 2022 | sundance 

Joe Biden has asked congress for two supplemental spending packages, $33 billion for the Ukraine/NATO money laundering operation (supported by both wings of the DC UniParty), and an additional $22 billion to deal with COVID, ie the money DC will use to send to states for another round of mail-in ballots for the November mid-terms.

Hillary Clinton’s former Vice-Presidential running mate, Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, appeared on CBS Face the Nation to discuss.  As noted by Senator Kaine, the Senate will happily authorize the $33 billion for Ukraine; however, the COVID spending bill will more likely run into resistance from the Republicans in the Senate who want to extract some of their own Wall Street priorities.

The forward-looking solution, as it appears from the Kaine perspective, is for Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer to work out a deal where both spending packages are bundled. This approach gives cover to the DeceptiCon wing of the republicans to support the COVID mail-in ballot funding scheme, in order to keep their UniParty proxy war in Ukraine fully funded.  WATCH:

Study of Breakthrough Infections in Highly Vaccinated Belgium Provides Significant Data


Published originally on TrialSite New Staff on Apr. 28, 2022, 7:30 p.m.

Belgium researchers embarked on a study that hopefully can shape future vaccination programs targeting COVID-19. In a recently published study, these scientists assessed the risk factors associated with developing COVID-19 after vaccination. The results of which were presented at this year’s European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) in Lisbon, Portugal, (23-26 April).  It turns out the mRNA-based vaccines afford more protection than those immunized with the AstraZeneca/Oxford viral vector vaccine.  

So, what are breakthrough infections? They are characterized when the pathogen evades vaccine-induced bodies, thereby infecting the inoculated person. In this study, Dr. Veerle Stouten and colleagues at Sciensano, the National Public Health Institute of Belgium, investigated the incidence of breakthrough infections associated with four different COVID-19 vaccine brands. These brands included Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), Oxford/AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1) and Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S).

The Study

More than 80% of adults in Belgium were fully vaccinated (received two doses) by August 11, 2021.

The study included all people in Belgium aged 18-plus who were fully vaccinated against COVID-19 between February 1 and December 5, 2021. The 8,062,000 participants were followed up for an average of 150 days, from 14 days after their second dose.

4.6% of the participants (373,070) were reported to have a breakthrough infection. This figure does not, however, take into account how long each participant was followed-up after the study. When this is factored in, the incidence rate is 11.2 per 100 person-years. This means that if participants were followed up for one year, 11.2 would be expected to develop a breakthrough infection. 

Results

Researchers share that “breakthrough infections were more common in those who had received viral vector vaccines than mRNA vaccines. Those who had previously had Covid had a lower risk of breakthrough infections.”

Overall, those vaccinated with a viral vector vaccine (Oxford/AstraZeneca or Janssen) had a higher risk of a breakthrough infection than those vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer/BioNTech or Moderna).

In addition, “There was a higher incidence of breakthrough infections in younger age groups (18-64 year olds) than in older age groups (65-84 or 85-plus year olds), which might be due to differences in social behavior.”

Natural immunity also comes into play here. Researchers observed from the analysis that “those with a prior COVID-19 infection before vaccination were 77% less likely to have a breakthrough infection than those who hadn’t had Covid previously.”

Significant Implications

Such information regarding breakthrough infections can be helpful when designing vaccination programs, including decisions about who would benefit most from a booster dose and the timing and type of vaccine to be used. 

Dr. Stouten adds: “We identified risk factors associated with breakthrough infections, such as vaccination with adenoviral-vector vaccines, which could help inform future decisions on booster vaccination strategies internationally.

Lead Research/Investigator

Dr. Veerle Stouten, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium

Belgium researchers embarked on a study that hopefully can shape future vaccination programs targeting COVID-19. In a recently published study, these scientists assessed the risk factors associated with developing COVID-19 after vaccination. The results of which were presented at this year’s European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) in Lisbon, Portugal, (23-26 April).  It turns out the mRNA-based vaccines afford more protection than those immunized with the AstraZeneca/Oxford viral vector vaccine.  

So, what are breakthrough infections? They are characterized when the pathogen evades vaccine-induced bodies, thereby infecting the inoculated person. In this study, Dr. Veerle Stouten and colleagues at Sciensano, the National Public Health Institute of Belgium, investigated the incidence of breakthrough infections associated with four different COVID-19 vaccine brands. These brands included Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), Oxford/AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1) and Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S).


Rhode Island Lawmakers Propose Doubling Taxes for Parents of Unvaccinated Children


Armstrong Economics Blog/Uncategorized Re-Posted Apr 25, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Democrats in Rhode Island have prepared legislation that could double taxes for parents of unvaccinated children. Senator Sam Bell, who is championing the bill, claims that there is a need for a universal mandate. Under the proposed law, unvaccinated residents would face a $50 monthly fine for noncompliance. Employers would also be required to mandate vaccines for all employees or face a $5,000 fine per violation. The biggest burden – “Any person who violates this chapter shall be required to pay a monthly civil penalty of fifty dollars ($50.00) and shall owe TWICE THE AMOUNT OF PERSONAL INCOME TAXES.”

To receive an exemption for a minor, three separate doctors must confirm that the child is “not fit for immunization.” Then the state would need to investigate each claim and determine whether or not the parents should be financially ruined. So even if three different doctors say that a child should not be vaccinated, the state may override them.

Biden lost his bid to implement a federal vaccine for employers last year, but the battle is not over. State lawmakers still have the capabilities to force compliance through any means possible. Bell wants to make the state of Rhode Island unlivable for the unvaccinated. While this is unlikely to pass, the fact that they are still attempting to force vaccinations in April 2022 shows that the war on medical freedom has not ceased.

The Ivermectin Wars Intensify as States Want Access Over the Counter and a Medical Freedom March Commences This Weekend


TrialSite Staff | Quality Journalism Jan. 21, 2022

TrialSite recently shared that a handful of states have proposed bills to ensure ivermectin is available to treat COVID-19 via a legitimate physician’s prescription. Those states include Indiana, Kansas, and New Hampshire. Recently, a leading proponent of the use of ivermectin, Dr. Paul Marik, one of the co-founders of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), discussed the pending New Hampshire ivermectin legislation with conservative news platform, America’s Voice Network.

Marik, board certified in Internal Medicine, Critical Care Medicine, Neurocritical Care, and Nutrition Science, is a key opinion leader who has worked in numerous hospitals and health systems from South Africa, UK, and of course, the United States where he is most recently affiliated with Eastern Virginia Medical School (EVMS) as well as other medical institutions. Not a stranger to controversy, or for that matter, pushing the comfort boundaries of the medical establishment, Marik isn’t a lightweight, with over 400 peer-reviewed journal articles, 50 book chapters, and author credits for four critical care books.

Recently, he filed a lawsuit against his hospital over the institution’s ban on various therapies including ivermectin, which happens to be a core therapy in his and his colleagues MATH+ Hospital Treatment Protocol for COVID-19. He and colleagues such as Dr. Pierre Kory experienced what they declare is censorship, as key journals had reviewed and accepted manuscripts, such as with the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, only to see the approvals retracted. Physicians such as those affiliated with the FLCCC represent prominent figures at this weekend’s medical freedom march.

Background

In a recent interview DR. PAUL MARIK | NEW HAMPSHIRE IVERMECTIN BILL – Good News | 45 | Data Matter (tvwfc.co.uk) with the conservative media platform America’s Voice Network, Marik shared his opinions on pending legislation, the importance of repurposed therapeutics, and who he thinks has been involved in the attack on ivermectin as an off-label treatment option.

The alternative media reporter, Heather Mullins, shared that New Hampshire’s bill is now “sponsored” and must still “go through some hurdles to get passed,” but if done so will “essentially make ivermectin available over the counter.” According to the TrialSite report, the proposed bill would authorize access at the pharmacy via a “standing order” which generally indicates authorization for nurses, pharmacists, and other appropriately credentialed health care professionals that if directed by state law, empowers the direct care and admonition of a vaccine or therapy (in this case ivermectin) based on an approved medical doctor-based approved protocol.

TrialSite didn’t report that Paul Marik testified for the proposed bill in New Hampshire. Mullins reports that Marik and other front-line physicians have been on the record that if ivermectin had been allowed for use as an early at-home prophylactic treatment targeting COVID-19,  hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved.

The Interview

Prior to the testimony in New Hampshire, Dr. Marik shared that 3.7 billion doses of ivermectin have been administered around the world, “changing the face of parasitic diseases on this planet.” Marik declared that ivermectin “is probably the second most important drug ever invented” [the drug’s inventors did win a Nobel Prize and the drug is on the World Health Organization Essential Drug List].

Declaring that the drug is cheap, safe, and “highly effective against SARS-CoV-2, and if used more widely this drug could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.”

Referring to its use in many other countries, the critical care physician went on the record that it’s a “lifesaving drug.” 

Why the pushback against ivermectin? Marik, now somewhat liberated given he isn’t dependent on his employer Sentara, let loose declaring, “There are multiple reasons, and this is probably generated by Big Pharma, government, and big corporations who don’t like cheap repurposed drugs.”  He continued, “So this is a war on cheap, repurposed drugs.” Emphasizing the goals of ivermectin’s adversaries, Marik stated, “They want you to use expensive designer drugs which in fact don’t work.”

In clarifying his understanding of the New Hampshire bill, Marik declared it is proposing to make ivermectin available over the counter [again via standing order] and according to the critical care doctor, it makes sense given the drug’s safety profile— “the drug is safer than Tylenol,” stated Marik. Repeating again the drug’s safety profile makes it safer than Tylenol, he went on the record “People should be given access to this drug in order to prevent and treat COVID.”

Marik espoused the critical FLCCC view that early treatment for COVID-19 absolutely represents a critical care strategy: simply waiting at home for a symptomatic phase, prompting a trip to the hospital raises significant danger for severe disease and worse.

The Controversy

According to Heather Mullins’ report, there has been a coordinated effort to censor the robust data pointing to at least some ivermectin-based efficacy around the world. Ivermectin study watchers often point to the website which tracks all ivermectin studies in a clean, orderly series of tables and graphs. While the majority of the 75 completed studies point to positive data points, the mainstream media and medical establishments in North America, Europe, and Australia have limited the number of studies within the research portfolio that they even acknowledge to just a handful. The others? These studies are dismissed because of bad quality. 

A couple of prominent studies showed no benefit, yet, at least one of them became surrounded with controversy and allegations among some industry watchers of conflict of interest. TrialSite notes this hasn’t been proven, and one study in Egypt that was part of a couple of meta-analysis studies turned out to have manipulated data. Yet even with the questionable Egyptian study, TrialSite’s Sonia Elijah’s investigation raised some disturbing questions in “How Ivermectin became a Target for the Fraud Detectives.”

TrialSite has chronicled ivermectin studies all over the world, including the ICON study done in Broward County early on during the pandemic. Of course, this study wasn’t a randomized controlled trial, thus limiting its impact. Interviews with the head of the largest hospital in the Dominican Republic as well as a well-respected investigator in Dhaka, Bangladesh, and interactions with doctors in Nigeria, Zimbabwe, South Africa, and India found positive data points. TrialSite even sponsored an objective documentary in Peru, one of the first nations to accept the use of the drug for the novel coronavirus.

After numerous interviews, study write-ups, and real-world observations, the case for ivermectin should be taken seriously. The U.S. National Institute of Health is financing an ivermectin-based study called ACTIV-6, while the University of Minnesota led one of the largest ongoing ivermectin studies called COVID-OUT.

The drug does have a proven safety profile at doses currently approved for parasitic indications. However, claims that higher dosages are just as safe as Tylenol might be a stretch—rather that claim would be associated with currently approved indications. Yet, it’s not a stretch to declare the drug is generally safe if taken off-label under the guidance of a licensed, competent physician.

The FDA’s behavior during this pandemic in association with ivermectin has been questionable, to say the least. Issuing warnings to the public not to use the animal variety of the drug, they emphasized that for the human version, it should be used only in clinical trials. TrialSite’s Sonia Elijah’s piece on obtaining FDA emails suggested the possibility of some form of disinformation campaign emanating from the world’s most respected food and drug regulatory body—an activity, if true, is beneath this organization.

FDA letters to medical and pharmacy boards and medical societies have led to considerable pressure on doctors employed by health systems and pharmacies not to allow ivermectin prescriptions off-label for COVID-19. In addition to a survey substantiating this trend, TrialSite chronicles plenty of instances evidencing efforts to block access. The TrialSite survey evidenced the effectiveness of an ongoing purge.

While there has been much controversy following the drug, Marik, Kory, and others actually visited the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel to discuss the evidence of efficacy against SARS-Cov-2 in early 2021.

Just weeks after that meeting the NIH changes its ivermectin recommendation.

 from use only in clinical trials to the following recommendation:

  • There is insufficient evidence for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific, evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19.

Yet if the drug is generally safe and a licensed physician along with an appropriately consenting patient agree to an off-label regimen, why would this vary from other standard off-label use cases that no one makes a fuss about? What is it about COVID? TrialSite has observed based on the severity and intensity of the pandemic, more federal involvement, and intervention in healthcare. Concerns of ivermectin took off when government, industry, and regulators discovered that prescriptions skyrocketed from 3,000 per week pre-pandemic to nearly 90,000 per week during the second year of the pandemic.

TrialSite recently reported on a study led by a University of Michigan doctor showing that at least $130 million in insurance claims for the drug treating COVID-19 in 2021—that figure is probably more than double when counting all the cash-based prescriptions.

Call to Action: What are your thoughts? Is the federal government simply trying to protect people by blocking access to ivermectin or is this part of some regulatory capture movement? Does this mean industry’s interest supersedes patients? Perhaps, the truth is more nuanced. While this TrialSite fact check on the fact checkers (Ivermectin) could be updated, its core arguments are sound.

TrialSite recently shared that a handful of states have proposed bills to ensure ivermectin is available to treat COVID-19 via a legitimate physician’s prescription. Those states include Indiana, Kansas, and New Hampshire. Recently, a leading proponent of the use of ivermectin, Dr. Paul Marik, one of the co-founders of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), discussed the pending New Hampshire ivermectin legislation with conservative news platform, America’s Voice Network.

Fauci on Federal Mask Mandate – Laws and Courts Have No Right to Impede on CDC Science and Regulations


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 21, 2022 | Sundance

Someone might want to knock Anthony Fauci down a few pegs from his high-horse position.   In this brief video, Fauci was asked for his opinion on the recent federal court ruling that the CDC exceeded its authority with a federal transportation mask mandate.

According to Fauci, the CDC bureaucratic science should supersede any constitutional, legal or limiting positions by the legislative or judicial branches of government.  In essence he’s saying the CDC is above the law.  WATCH:

The CDC is a subservient regulatory agency just like every other agency within government and is just as subject to the laws and legal limitations of the constitution as any other agency would be.  However, in the worldview of Fauci and the Branch Covidians, the power of science puts them above the law.

In semi-related news…. “Philadelphia will end its COVID-19 indoor mask mandate less than a week after reinstating it, city health officials said Thursday night.” {LINK}

Biden Administration Will Appeal Federal Court Ruling and Attempt to Reinstitute Federal Mask Mandate


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 20, 2022 | Sundance 

Ideological leftism is contingent upon appeasing the most insane elements of the extreme left.

As a consequence, the Biden political CDC has announced they need the Biden political DOJ to try and get the federal mask mandate put back into place.

CDC Announcement: “To protect CDC’s public health authority beyond the ongoing assessment announced last week, CDC has asked DOJ to proceed with an appeal in Health Freedom Defense Fund, Inc., et al., v. Biden, et alIt is CDC’s continuing assessment that at this time an order requiring masking in the indoor transportation corridor remains necessary for the public health.” (LINK)

According to NBC News, “the Justice Department said that it has filed a notice of appeal “in light of today’s assessment by the CDC” in a statement late Wednesday afternoon.” (LINK)

The Covidians who define themselves by their adherence to the dictates of the U.S. government, are happy.  However, in an election year where the overwhelming majority of the American people have had enough of this political science, this decision fuels an angry rebuke.