Yay for Our Side that Bill Barr spoke out against the Tyrannical Lockdowns, but The Left thought they hit pay dirt because he dared to utter the S-Word - Slavery - so they all went into attack mode - twisting, spinning, LYING galore ...

'A Very Strange Speech': What AG Barr's Words Mean

[www.youtube.com]

*********

Lib Media said:

"His claim that people staying in their homes protecting senior citizens and protecting their loved ones with underlying conditions, that that somehow is as bad as Slavery."

BARR NEVER SAID THAT WAS AS BAD AS SLAVERY - he said, SECOND ONLY TO SLAVERY. So LIB MEDIA LIE!

Barr said: "Other than Slavery, which was a different kind of constraint, this is THE GREATEST INTRUSION ON CIVIL LIBERTIES IN HISTORY!"

Then Joe Biden LIED: "Think about it - did you ever think any of you you'd hear the Attorney General say that following the recommendations of the scientific community to save your and other people's lives is equivalent to Slavery. People being put in chains."

The obligatory black Lib guy said - "It seems to me that William Barr is searching so desperately to find a way to describe describe WHITE Americans who REFUSE TO WEAR A MASK AS VICTIMS." And "The idea of Liberty and Freedom here has become a Synonym for Selfishness. People are using Freedom and Liberty as an excuse to be Selfish and Mean-Spirited and endanger people who they don't care about other than themselves."

Incendiary Media.

**************

Here is the Transcript of Bill Barr's remarks.

[www.lawfareblog.com]

Here is the section where he spoke of Lockdowns as a Violation of Civil Liberties -

Questioner: What are the constitutional hurdles for forbidding a church from meeting during COVID-19?

Barr: The rule right now is articulated by the Supreme Court. Some people might disagree with that, in the sense that it doesn't go far enough in protecting religion, but the current standard is that you can place restrictions on the exercise of religion as long as you don't discriminate against religion and apply the same restrictions on everybody else that is similarly situated. You can’t allow people to go to theaters and get together in commercial establishments or other kinds of activities and then prohibit churches from doing it. And some of the states were going that far. So that's the basic hurdle you have to get over.

I know you're from Michigan, and therefore you're particularly sensitive to the caprice of the governor's regulations. I am very amused, because the press gets all huffy, huffy and puffy about you know, Bill Barr believes in strong executive power, ooh, you know, he's a, he's a fascist or something like that. But they couldn't be happier with the Governors. What kind of power are they exercising? Executive power. In many states, there are no statutes, or the legislators bowed out of the picture. They’re just letting the governors do what they want to do.

What I've said is, yes, executive power by its very nature does come and should fill the void right at the beginning of any crisis like this. In some crises like war, you do need a strong component of executive leadership. But once the emergency nature of it starts to abate, the legislature should give a little bit more guidance -- like yeah, you can do this for 30 days and then come back to us. If we don't like what we're doing, we’ll exercise a little more control over it. But there has been very little of that. And most of the governors do what bureaucrats always do, which is they act, you know, they defy common sense. And a lot of what they do is they treat free citizens as babies that can't take responsibility for themselves and others. So I was saying, well, one, you know, we have to give businesspeople an opportunity. Tell them which rule of masks you have this month. Tell the business people what the rules are, and then let them try to adapt their business to that. Then you'll have ingenuity and people will at least have the freedom to try to earn a living. But putting a national lockdown, stay at home orders, is like house arrest. Other than slavery, which was a different kind of restraint, this is the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history.

We supported this case. We did get a lot of the states to ease up on the churches and you know, we'd write letters to the governors and the governors would comply. But my view was, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that an artificial cap of 10 doesn't make any sense when you're talking about St. Patrick's Cathedral compared to a small country church. And so one of the rules under the Constitution is you have to sort of calibrate whatever burden you're going to place on religion, you're gonna have to take account of the circumstances and make it as narrow as possible to achieve your end. And so we said, how about just a percentage of the fire marshal occupancy standard? The Supreme Supreme Court, five, four vote wouldn't go along with that because they wanted to say that you have to give a lot of latitude to governors in these crises. I agree, you should give a lot of latitude but we have epidemics and pandemics -- this is a very serious one, a grave one. But they come and just because something is a medical crisis, it doesn't give a complete blank check to executive rule.

Questioner: That leads me to wonder: I read that there have been north of 75,000 suicides during the shutdown. And what mechanism is there or should there be in the government to take care of all these ancillary effects?

Barr: Here's my problem. I have great respect for the medical profession. But the scariest day in a lawyer's life is when he realizes the medical profession is really pretty much the same as the legal profession. They're human beings. They put their pants on one leg at a time. They’re right sometimes, they’re wrong other times. There's some good doctors, there's some bad doctors. But just like lawyers, doctors are specialists. They will view a broad social problem and issue through a set of blinders in a sense. So, you know, your doctor might say to you, Bill, if you want to live 20 years longer, you should just do this, this, this, this and this. And he might be right. But I don't want to pay those costs to live 20 years longer. I'd rather take my chances. Now, I understand there are externalities here, and you can't threaten other people's lives. But the point is that you have to balance that against a lot of other factors. The point you made is exactly what was not done, but was self evident to anyone who had the power of logic. Which is, “yes, doctor, you might be right. But just think of all the collateral consequences and the costs of that. And that is not science, okay?” It is the generalist and the representatives of the entire community that should be making these balancing acts. It is not dictated by science. So all this nonsense about how something is dictated by science is nonsense.

Suicides are just the tip of the iceberg. The overdoses are out of control, they're getting back up again. After the first time in decades, this administration actually started flattening it out and bringing it down a little on opioids -- they’re going back up again. And now, with cheap methamphetamine swamping the country, and forms of opioid that are extremely deadly -- fentanyl, synthetic opioids -- we now have the overdose deaths going up. We have domestic violence getting out of control. I'm sure that the shutting down of the economy and telling everyone to stay in their house has contributed to violent crime going up in many of our cities. The interruption of education, especially for disadvantaged children in the inner city, is devastating.These costs are massive.

How you balance these things is not dictated, you know -- I'm sorry, a person in the white coat is not the grand seer who can come up with a right decision for society. A free people makes its decisions through its elected representatives."[/size]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2020 10:49PM by Jennifer.

[www.bitchute.com]

Crappy video but....anyway

Kaufman

Thanks, that was excellent! I sent it to a friend who knows about Dr. Kaufman and communicates with a ton of people and she'll spread it far. It's a shame I don't dare send it to some of my family members because they're into this deep - two of my sisters who are Libs. And my daughter who had breast cancer and did chemo, so she's into the masks and keeping herself 'safe', because she's vulnerable. She's very sensitive and fragile right now, so I'm just trying to be supportive to her.

This is weird and I guess it's just me and how my mind works, and it's hard to explain:

I wish there was a transcript of what Dr. Kaufman said, the words on the screen. Because it's like he was telling a story, a narrative, history, that happened at another time and place to other people. It's like when I'm living this now, it sort of doesn't seem that weird, but regular life almost, like a blip, just part of what happens in life in the world. But when I listen to or read The Narrative, the Story, the History, as Dr. Kaufman told it, as though it was history, that happened in another time and place, and it was a horrible thing. Looking at it as if it happened in the past to other people, not me. A different perspective. Maybe like as if I was "A Witness" or "A Watcher". When I'm not involved, I get it, the horribleness of it. The Evil.

It's how I feel when I listen to or read about Communist Russia becoming a Communist Country. For Example. Something like this: "Soon there was a food shortage, and everyone had to stand in line to get even a loaf of bread. Nobody was allowed to leave the country. Everyone's guns and weapons were confiscated. The government took over the Communication, the television and radio networks, and controlled all the news and TV shows. Everyone was turned into a snitch and spied on and told on their neighbors and nobody trusted anyone else. The government took everybody's money and took the money from all the bank accounts. People were only allowed to have one child. People who spoke out against the government were put in jail or disappeared."

In future, if simple stories and books could be written about this event, the narrative, the history. How about a fairy tale about this. Where are the books and movies about this nightmare. But it would only seem like an Atrocity if we go back to the way life was before this Plandemic happened. But if we're in a Soft Tyranny and this treatment continues over time, this all will seem Ordinary and not a Horrific Event that happened in the past.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2020 01:42AM by Jennifer.

Quote
fresh
[www.bitchute.com]

Crappy video but....anyway

Kaufman

[www.bitchute.com]
Dr. Andrew Kaufman in London (via Spacebusters) - NOW DELETED by YouTube!
12:25 Minute Video

First published at 12:02 UTC on September 20th, 2020.
There was a media blackout on this latest Trafalgar Square protest in London. Dr. Kaufman was seen and heard via big screen.

JR’s Notes:

0:43 MM
I saw what was happening over in China last December and knew something was very, very wrong. I remembered SARS [Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome], Zika, Ebola, Swine Flu (H1N1), Bird Flu, MERS [Middle East Respiratory Syndrome], Denge, Eastern Equine Encephalitis, the list goes on. These were all hype, of course, but this time things were different. I discovered that if I looked at the numbers, I could see right away the number of Deaths was comparable to the regular Seasonal Flu, so WHY all the Fear mongering?

I then looked at the Scientific Papers about the “Virus”. I was shocked at what I found. I discovered that despite widespread Media and Government claims of a Virus Causing Disease, there was NO PROOF! What the Scientists did is extract some Genes or Pieces of Genes from a couple of people and they called this a “Virus”. My question is, though, how do you identify Genes as being from a Virus when the Virus itself has never been discovered? 1:50 MM

It’s one thing to hold a creature in your hand, even a Virus, and take out its Genes and sequence them. That’s how they sequenced the Human Genome - they started with an actual Human. For “Viruses” they don’t do this! Instead, they take a Biological Soup of hundreds of Organisms and pull out a few little Pieces of Genes. In fact, they look for Genes or Pieces of Genes they say are “Viruses” because of doing these same experiments in Sick people in days gone by. So when they find these little fragments of Genes, they can’t say which Organism they came from because they came from this Soup. This is Scientific FRAUD! NO Virus is ever purified in order to identify it. 2:40 MM

11:14 MM
So what should we do now?

We need to STOP going along with their rules!

We need to start saying NO MORE!

1. NO MORE MASKS. Instead we need SMILES.

2. NO MORE Distancing. Instead we need HUGS.

3. NO MORE School Restrictions. We need mentally strong children for our future.

4. NO MORE STAYING AT HOME! Instead we need Sunlight, Nature and Exercise.

5. NO MORE BANS ON LARGE GATHERINGS! We need picnics, concerts, fairs, conferences and swimming pools.

6. NO MORE CLOSING BUSINESSES! We need to make a living.

7. NO CONTRACT TRACING! We need privacy and autonomy.

8. NO VACCINE! We need our Health and our lives.

9. NO MORE TYRANNY! WE DEMAND FREEDOM!

Thank you. 12:17 MM

Quote
Jennifer
It's a shame I don't dare send it to some of my family members because they're into this deep - two of my sisters who are Libs.

I'm pretty positive that anyone who was around you listening to your gibberish for any length of time would run in the opposite direction. Guess you're a useful IDIOT...

Bill Barr may have swayed the opinion of some Americans about the Plandemic when he said that:

"Other than Slavery, which was a different kind of constraint, this is THE GREATEST INTRUSION ON CIVIL LIBERTIES IN HISTORY!"

Because if this Rasmussen Survey is any indication, maybe 30% of Americans are now Coronavirus Skeptics -

33% Agree Coronavirus Lockdown Is Historic Assault on Civil Liberties

[outline.com]

SEPTEMBER 23, 2020

Politics continues to be a major defining factor when voters are asked about America’s response to the coronavirus. One-third of voters share U.S. Attorney General William Barr’s assessment that the resulting national lockdown is an unprecedented assault on civil liberties.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 33% of Likely U.S. Voters agree with Barr’s statement last week that “…putting a national lockdown, stay at home orders, is like house arrest. Other than slavery which was a different kind of restraint, this is the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history.” Fifty-seven percent (57%) disagree, while 10% are not sure.

Here is the survey question wording:

[www.rasmussenreports.com]

National Survey of 1,000 U.S. Likely Voters

Conducted August September 17 and 20, 2020

By Rasmussen Reports


1* Looking back, do you think most medical projections about the impact of COVID-19 on the United States were overestimated, underestimated or about right?

2* Did the United States overreact or underreact to the coronavirus threat? Or has the response been about right?

3* Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Putting a national lockdown, stay at home orders, is like house arrest. Other than slavery, which was a different kind of restraint, this is the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in American history."


NOTE: Margin of Sampling Error, +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence