All Episodes
Previous Next
May 23, 2022 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
45:37
Mike Hamilton joins the Health Ranger to reveal LEGAL truths about vaccine mandates
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The real issue and the number one issue in my view is the right to bodily integrity.
You have the right to own your own body.
You can say what goes into it.
And if you look at the cases that the Supreme Court has affirmed, they say it's, on the one hand, they say bodily integrity is so important that you can execute a child who's still in the womb.
But on the other hand, it's so meaningless that we can stick you with an experimental gene therapy without your informed consent.
consent and that makes no sense whatsoever.
Welcome to the Health Ranger Report here on Vryteon.tv.
I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, the founder of Brighteon.
And as you know, I built this platform so that we can have conversations like the one you're going to hear today.
I'm interviewing Mike Hamilton, who is an attorney working with America's frontline doctors.
His website is cornerstoneattorney.com.
He's based out of Kentucky, and he's helping to fight for freedom against these outrageous, overreaching vaccine mandates, mask mandates, and other onerous coercion tactics, shall we say, put upon us by the federal government and in some cases state governments as well.
So we're going to talk to Mike today about the pushback on the legislative front.
I'm sorry, the legal front, eventually legislative.
But right now it's the legal pushback against these mandates and where we are winning and getting some traction in the courts.
We're already seeing Biden backing off or at least delaying the federal mandate.
A lot of other good news coming.
So stay with us here on Brighton.tv.
We'll be right back after this break.
Thank you.
All right, welcome back, folks.
Mike Adams here, Brighteon.tv, and we're joined by attorney Mike Hamilton.
Again, his website is cornerstoneattorney.com, and he is helping us to use the legal system to fight back against vaccine mandate tyranny and other issues that affect the future of our lives and our children.
Mike Hamilton, it's great to have you on the show today.
Welcome, and just hello.
Thank you, Mike.
It's an honor to be here.
I'm excited to be in conversation with you.
I'm very excited about what you've been doing with your platform to talk about what's really going on.
I mean, the legal battle is a way to fight this war.
It's ultimately not a legal war, and you've been hitting that pretty hard.
I would say we're in a spiritual battle, and the legal side is where I fight that battle.
Anyway, it's great to be here.
Well, it's an honor to have you on because you are one of the outstanding attorneys in America that's actually filing cases to challenge all of this.
So first of all, before we get into that, give us a little background about yourself, what brought you to this moment, and also you're a member of the ADF. Tell us a little bit about the ADF because I think that's an organization a lot of our viewers would like to support here.
We're coming up on year end, you know, maybe some donations as well.
But give us a little background if you would, please.
Sure.
You know, I grew up in a small town.
I came from a two-stoplight town, Wilmore, Kentucky.
It's a college town.
My father was a professor of philosophy there.
And we grew up without a TV, and he had a lot of Marxist literature in the house from dissidents.
So I read Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
Just about everything he wrote by the time I was out of high school.
I didn't have a TV to watch, so I had to read what was around the house.
And I ended up majoring in philosophy, studying Marxism, studying communism.
After I got out of college, of course, I discovered, which you probably already know, there's no philosopher's wanted section in the newspaper.
I ended up in seminary, but at some point along the way in that theological sort of...
I felt like the good Lord was telling me that he wanted me to be in law school.
So 10 years after I graduated from college, I went back to law school.
And I've been doing...
I've been lawyering for 20 years.
When this business happened, I was probably like a lot of other people.
I was wiping down my groceries.
I brought them back from the store, you know.
I was a little nervous.
Something was happening out there, and I didn't know what it was.
But it didn't take me very long to see that something was wrong.
To realize that these masks were about control.
Things weren't right.
They weren't adding up.
And I had the opportunity to get into the legal battles.
And I have set aside the rest of my practice.
This is what I do full-time now.
So what are some of the...
I know America's Frontline Doctors, they're one of your clients, but what are the key legal battles that you're involved in right now that you can share with us?
I know there may be others that you can't talk about yet, but areas where you've engaged with filings, pending lawsuits or actions, things like that.
Give us kind of an overview, if you would, please.
Sure.
I work really closely with Tom Renz.
Who I think you know.
And Tom and I... So I'm involved in some things that we've gone after the CDC on the 2013 Coroner's Handbook, the rule changes that they made that have allowed doctors to say that people who have died with COVID have died from COVID, and so they've exaggerated the numbers.
I've been able to work with Tom on some of that stuff.
Most recently, we filed...
Against the vaccine mandates in the Northern District of Alabama on behalf of America's frontline doctors, on behalf of some federal contractors.
We've attacked the executive orders, and there's been some traction in some other states.
We've added some claims that I'm not sure are present in some of the other lawsuits.
We've gone after the vaccine manufacturers, and I'm going to say vaccine because it's shorthand, but we don't think they're vaccines.
I want to be clear on that, and I know You're on the same page.
But when people hear me say vaccine, they need to understand I'm abbreviating.
It's a little quicker than saying the gene therapy experimental jabs.
But we know they're not vaccines.
And we've talked about misbranding in our complaint.
Misbranding is a criminal offense.
We think that Pfizer and Moderna and Johnson& Johnson have engaged in misbranding.
They've engaged in adulteration.
They've They've called these vaccines something they aren't.
They've lied to the American people.
They put things in that are harmful that don't need to be in there.
And they've hid the eight ball on that stuff.
And so we've attacked them on those things.
We've said the executive orders are a legislative move by the executive branch.
So it's unconstitutional.
And of course, mandating violates bodily integrity, which is a fundamental liberty protected by the Constitution.
It's sort of an attempt by Biden to sidestep the Constitution with a legislative action so that he can violate people's constitutional liberties.
And allow these criminals to injure people.
Well, let me ask you a key legal question on this.
If this did not come out of the executive, but rather if Congress did pass a law mandating vaccine, whatever they call a vaccine, okay, then I take it in your view that would still be unconstitutional, even if it were from the legislative branch, correct?
Absolutely.
I mean, the legislature has the right to Pass a law and to do it in a proper way.
But if the law is unconstitutional, it still should be struck down by the courts.
That's why we have the system of government that we have.
And we would definitely attack any kind of a vaccine mandate on the constitutional grounds.
What are the key constitutional arguments against the vaccine mandate, even if it were passed by Congress?
Well, there are a number of things that are being done wrong.
I mean, first and foremost, in our Alabama case, We originally asked for injunctive relief for three classes of people.
Just to give a little background in the answer to your question, we said if you're under 18, you're at no risk of death from COVID. You shouldn't be getting the jab.
If you've already had COVID, then you have natural immunity, which is superior.
And we also know that people that have already had it that get a vaccine are at greater risk from the vaccine than even those who haven't had it.
So anybody who's already had it, they should be exempt.
And then anybody who hasn't had enough information to provide informed consent.
And that's pretty much everybody in the world.
We talk about the Trusted News Initiative, the suppression of medical information so that, quote-unquote, vaccine hesitancy can't arise in the population.
And this is the antithesis of informed consent.
So these things violate a handful of constitutional liberties.
People aren't getting...
But the real issue and the number one issue in my view is the right to bodily integrity.
You have the right to own your own body.
You can say what goes into it.
And if you look at the cases that the Supreme Court has affirmed, they say it's...
On the one hand, they say bodily integrity is so important that you can execute a child who's still in the womb.
But on the other hand, it's so meaningless that we can stick you with an experimental gene therapy.
Without your informed consent.
And that makes no sense whatsoever.
But bodily integrity is not specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution.
So I guess it's from previous Supreme Court decisions, correct, that you're referring to?
That's right.
That's right.
So it has been affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Bodily integrity has as a fundamental liberty that is subject to strict scrutiny.
Right.
Well, I'm sorry, go ahead.
Well, as you know, strict scrutiny means that they can't take that liberty away from you, even in a so-called emergency, without the highest standard of review.
And the courts, I believe the court in Missouri just said that they can't even satisfy rational basis review, which is a much lower level of scrutiny.
Right.
So do you get the sense that the executive, the Biden regime, and to some extent, governors of these states, that they always knew all along that their demands would never withstand the legal challenges and constitutional challenges, but they just tried to rush them through by setting deadlines and just kind of blustering their way through this from the beginning to get away with as much as they could?
Is that your sense?
No question about it.
Absolutely.
That's what they've done.
I mean, you know, a little while ago, there was the whole business about Pfizer, and they did kind of a psych op on everybody, saying, well, this vaccine was approved.
Well, you know, Pfizer wasn't approved.
It was given a continued approval as an emergency use authorization, and something that nobody can get that's not even in manufacture was approved.
Approved at some level, but it had nothing to do with these so-called vaccines.
But it was a bait-and-switch that people would just say, oh, okay, well, it's approved.
I might as well take it.
We know that the government has a financial interest in these things.
The CDC has a financial interest.
The NIH and Fauci all have deep-vested financial interest in everything from Moderna stock to royalties.
They've got patents.
And so they're all making money.
And they don't care whether it ultimately stands.
What they care about is making as much as they can right now.
I don't think that's the only thing they care about.
I think they believe they're too big to fail.
And they're just going to push this thing.
And I believe that their agenda is far more than how much money can we make.
Yeah, I think most of our viewers would agree with you on that.
But I'd like to ask you to address the enormity of the legal challenge here, because previous to this, The biggest legal cases would be against an industry, such as the big tobacco lawsuits in the 1990s, or even as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
is doing, suing Monsanto or Bayer, for example, over glyphosate exposure.
But I don't think we've ever seen in the history of our nation, probably the world, A legal effort that needs to be directed at what can only be described as a cabal of complicit institutions, big tech, big media, big government, big pharma, all working together to mislead people, to commit fraud that induces great harm.
I mean, what are your thoughts on that and what you're really up against here?
Well, there's no question that, I mean, we're up against People with massive resources, people who have a long-term plan, people who have been working this plan for a long time.
They've been conditioning people through the education system.
If you think about it, Dewey, the father of modern education, said at one time he said that we have to dumb down the reading requirements because readers are thinkers and thinkers have no place in a collectivist society.
This is the guy who, the Dewey Decimal System, he wrote the Humanist Manifesto and he said humanism Is our religion.
And we're talking about a soft form of Marxism here.
And I'm going to say that a rose by any other name is a rose.
We're talking about, you know, tyranny.
He says, but humanism is our religion and the lectern is our pulpit.
What chance, he said, do parents and teachers have against us when we have the children eight hours a day and they have them a few hours a week?
Right.
So this has been going on for a long time.
It's huge.
I talked to somebody not too long ago and he said, Man, he said, the opponents here have more money than God.
And I said, actually, the one thing that I take heart in is that they don't.
They have massive resources, but they don't have more money than God.
Right, right.
And no one has anything compared to the power of God once he decides to intervene.
But I love the fact that your background is philosophy.
And so let me ask you this question about collectivism.
What we've really seen that's fascinating in all of this is in America roughly about half the nation The people, not just on the left, but sort of collectivist obedience followers, they have decided that they love obedience, that they love wearing a mask to show their obedience, to even advertise it to others, and then that they can be turned into the Stanford prison experiment guards to try to enforce this upon others.
Whereas the other half of the nation, roughly, is saying, no, wait a second, you can't order us around and tell us what to do.
First of all, I'm surprised that almost half the nation raised their hand and said, you know, we want to be obedient slaves and do whatever you tell us.
How do you explain that in terms of philosophy?
So, you know, I will say that the leftists have taken a long view for a long time.
The communists have infiltrated the, you know, I would love to have a president who would simply defund the National Education Association.
Put school back in the hands of local school boards run by parents who care about their children getting educated.
The idea for a long time has been not to educate children, but to condition them.
And it was very disconcerting for me, very disconcerting and disappointing and actually somewhat depressing to walk into my local Kroger, where I've been going for years, and to see people that I should know that I couldn't recognize them.
And I just...
I began to realize, you know, they were shutting down schools.
They were shutting down restaurants, churches, bars.
And I'm like, why are we shutting these places down but the big box stores are staying open?
And there's no question, but that's where ideas get spoken about.
That's where people meet together to talk about things like, to talk about what we're talking about now, to talk about freedom.
And those things were being shut down and people were being isolated in public.
That was the purpose of the mask.
Control and My son has a shirt that says, fear is not a virtue.
And I've seen that shirt in other places.
But people are virtue signaling with their masks and with fear.
And they're walking around, shuffling about with their heads down, accepting something that's not healthy, it's not normal, for something that kills fewer people than the flu.
And so I just believe that as a society, we've been conditioned through Political correctness, you know, say anything but that you disagree with somebody.
Don't call somebody wrong.
Call them any bad name in the book.
Don't call them wrong.
Don't say that their truth isn't the truth.
And I don't even, I'm a little bit at a loss for words, except that I know that this conditioning has been deliberate.
It's been long-term.
And right now we're seeing the fruits of it for the other side.
And by the other side, I mean those who would You know, those who would bring tyranny and a one world order and that sort of thing about and treat everybody as slaves under their control.
So, fortunately, we have a constitutional framework upon which this nation was founded that is still in place.
We have a legal framework that's still in place.
And as much as they try to bypass that and wage culture wars, which is what you're just referring to, where the rubber meets the road in the courtrooms in front of the judges, you know, the facts still win out.
So I guess my question to you is, what's your prognosis?
Do you have optimism that as the facts are presented to the courts, About, number one, you know, the misrepresentation of the vaccines and even more data coming out about vaccines causing harm and increasing risk of hospitalizations and deaths and so on, that the facts are going to win out and the courts are ultimately going to reaffirm the structure of civil rights upon which America exists?
It's a great question, Mike, and I have to tell you that I have to acknowledge that we have judges out there who don't care about the facts, okay?
We have judges that are fully corrupt, that are sitting in seats of power, that they will listen to the facts and simply do what they wish.
Those people are out there.
But we also see cases getting traction.
We see federal judges in the Fifth Circuit.
You know, the federal court said, you know, we're not going to We're going to put a stay on these things.
And that eventually got moved through a lottery system to the Sixth Circuit.
We see these victories in Missouri just recently.
So the rule of law is not dead.
And the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land.
So my prayer is, and as an attorney, when I look at taking a case, I'm looking at the cause of action.
I'm looking at where we can bring that case.
Because not every venue is the same.
Same cause of action in one venue may not have the success that it will in another.
So it's important to be strategic about these things and to take on...
There are a precious few of us who are in this battle who have said, you know, I'm ready to put a target on myself.
And this is where, kind of like...
So here's the theology coming in.
You know, Martin Luther was given a chance to recant, and he said, it's not wise or safe to go against conscience.
Here I stand.
I can do no other.
And, you know, when I was faced with the choice to get into this battle, I never asked myself, should I do it?
The question was always, how can I not?
But there aren't that many who are willing to do that, who are willing to say, I don't care about my career.
I don't care about my safety.
This is the right thing, and we have to fight it.
Well, you're a member of an organization, the ADF, that does stand on principle, even in the face of extreme threats and deplatforming and so on.
Tell us a little bit about the ADF and the mission.
So the ADF, and if somebody from the ADF is listening, and I get this a little bit wrong, forgive me.
But ADF is an outfit, Allies Defending Freedom.
And it's an organization of attorneys that are groomed.
To become an allied attorney is not an easy process.
You have to show that you're excellent at what you do and that you're a believer.
And their core mission has to do with sanctity of life, religious freedom.
And that's not Christian religious freedom.
It's religious freedom.
And traditional marriage.
And so on.
So the ADF has been around for a long time.
I want to say that maybe Dobson and D. James Kennedy were sort of original founders of the organization.
And once you apply and are accepted, I went to Chicago over a decade ago for a couple of weeks in constitutional law training, real specific.
In return, I promised to give 400 hours over a period of years pro bono.
In areas of their mission.
I know they're doing a lot right now to push back on religious exemptions.
They've been extremely helpful to people.
It's an absolutely great organization.
And if I'm looking for help in a state that I'm not licensed to practice in, I can go to the roster and find a fellow allied attorney and make that connection quickly.
And so there's a network of attorneys as we Get into litigation that other people have done in other parts of the country.
There's a support system there.
What's their main website?
I believe that it is telladf.org.
T-E-L-L-A-D-F dot org.
Okay.
All right.
We'll put it on screen for people.
So they're also defending traditional marriage, as you said.
And this religious exemptions issue is really critical because we've seen from...
The radical vaccine pushing groups, some of them I've seen have said, well, if you claim a religious exemption on this, therefore you may never take Tylenol again.
Right?
And it's like, what do you mean?
What does that have to do with any of this?
So they're imposing their own actually kind of atheist or cultist belief systems on people.
They don't even understand what religion means.
Right.
They don't.
They don't understand what faith means.
And they say, you know, they demand that people tell them everything they've ever taken.
That's nonsense.
They don't have the right to ask those questions.
That's right.
And they attack people.
The idea is to attack whether or not you have a sincerely held religious belief.
So somebody pushed back recently.
I was helping somebody in the Midwest, and their organization said, we think you may not have all the facts.
You know, no fetal tissue went into the manufacture of these, no aborted fetal tissue.
These come from lines that were, they grew in a lab.
And by the way, this religious organization over here has said you shouldn't have, you know, a problem.
And therefore, since you now know those things, maybe you're better educated.
And we pushed back and said, thanks for the information, but we know that without elective abortions back in the 60s and 70s, none of these cell lines that are grown in labs would exist.
Mike, I'm sorry to interrupt.
We're wrapping up the Brighttown TV segment here.
We're going to have an extended conversation on brighttown.com.
But for those of you watching on Brighttown TV, thank you for watching today.
The rest of this is on brighttown.com.
Take care.
Okay, continuing with our extended conversation.
Sorry about the interruption.
I cut you off there.
So, go ahead.
Yeah.
So, the pushback was, you need to know about these aborted lines.
And we said, hey, these things that grew in a lab, they came from elective abortions in the 60s and 70s.
And then they said, there's organizations that have said that you shouldn't have a religious exemption, and they're religious organizations.
So our pushback was to say, thank you for the information.
We knew before telling you we had a religious objection that there were people out there who might not agree with us.
And the fact that you've confirmed the existence of those people doesn't change our sincerely held religious belief whatsoever.
Right.
Well, but this gets to a really key issue in the culture war.
So when there's about to be potentially a federal law that offers federal protection for transgenders, But there is no requirement that anyone prove that they are a transgender.
Simply the assertion of a self-recognition of a state of transgenderism is the only evidence that will be required, or has been required, under any of these systems.
In other words, if a transgender woman, i.e.
a biological man pretending to be a woman, wants to enter The women's locker room in a gym in Los Angeles, there aren't guards there that say, prove to me you really believe in your transgenderism, right?
That never happens.
So this selective enforcement, it's like a Salem witch trial, is kind of what it feels like here.
You have to prove your Christian beliefs, and it's subject to their approval.
And not only do you have to prove them, my understanding is that now they're making less than keeping I mean,
in other words, the principles that go into the Constitution at every level are violated by these practices.
That's right.
That's right.
Well, but then the question becomes the Supreme Court.
Now, of course, we have, what, four Trump-appointed justices in place.
Some of their recent decisions have not necessarily been in alignment with what many Trump supporters thought they would do.
But it seems like a lot of these issues are ultimately going to end up on the docket of SCOTUS. How do you think the Supreme Court will end up deciding on these big questions?
My prayer is that they'll follow the Constitution.
You know, on these questions of fundamental liberty, the Supreme Court has protected things like Roe v.
Wade for a long time.
And when you look at a case like Planned Parenthood versus Casey, where they say bodily integrity is a fundamental liberty, you can execute a child, it's that important.
Now they're faced with a conundrum, because is it a fundamental liberty to that extent?
Or are we casting aside the fundamental liberty?
And that puts their precious Roe v.
Wade at risk.
And people need to understand.
I mean, I'm sure you've talked about it.
Roe v.
Wade, it's a state's rights issue.
It's not an abortion issue.
It's a state's rights issue.
If it's overturned, states are going to be able to make their own decisions about these things.
But the Supreme Court is...
Has painted themselves into some corners over the years, and we're hoping that those corners will fall out in the protection of the liberty interests at stake right now.
But isn't it also possible that they could overturn Roe v.
Wade at the same time asserting government ownership over your body and therefore vaccine mandates would be affirmed by the Supreme Court to say you don't have the right to control your body either in abortion nor in vaccines.
Is that possible?
I mean, look, Yes, it's possible.
Sure.
I mean, it would be an anathema to all that America was built on.
Okay, but it's possible.
They could do that.
I hate to see what would happen in this country if they do.
Right, true.
I mean, I was in conversation with...
With an older gentleman who was a Vietnam veteran, and I thanked him for his service.
He said, if it's an honor, I would do it again.
He was walking with two canes, and I said, where do you think all this is headed?
You know, we were, as part of our conversation, and he looked at me with an eye that was as sharp as it was probably 40 years ago, and he put both his canes in one hand, and he patted his hip, and he said, I'll tell you this, we veterans will not live on our knees.
I said, well, thank God for your spirit, because that's the spirit that America was built on.
And, you know, government ownership of our bodies, you know, I think that there are too many Americans who say, we'll not live on our knees.
And that would be a complete violation of the Constitution.
So here's another aspect to this that I wanted to ask you.
The CDC changed the definition of a vaccine in order to kind of lay the groundwork for this emergency use authorization of something that you and I both know is not a vaccine.
It's a gene therapy, transfection agent of some kind, would not fit the old definition of a vaccine.
If it comes down to this phenomenon where government can create crisis, even in collusion with media and collusion with big tech, they can create a crisis and then use that crisis to demand you be injected with whatever they define as a vaccine, then they can expand that definition at any time to include anything, euthanasia shots, radioactive isotope injections, anything, And just create an emergency to push that.
I mean, that's where this is going if the Supreme Court allows vaccine mandates.
They're allowing anything, it seems.
What are your thoughts?
Yeah, yeah.
No question about it.
What you're describing can and will happen.
There's no question.
I mean, in the name of medical tyranny, it's not just vaccines, but that's going to happen.
By changing the definition, you know, they...
With regard to changing the definitions, I mean, we'll go back to the 2013 Coroner's Handbook.
The CDC promulgated a rule.
They did it without notice and an opportunity for comment.
They violated several federal laws when they did it that way, but they said, you know, and for those of your viewers who don't know, that all the coroners in the country have to follow a manual, and it's called the 2013 Coroner's Handbook.
And they go step-by-step through that manual to determine cause of death.
The CDC said that's still on for everything except for COVID. With regard to COVID, now you don't have to have a test.
If a person has a little bit of a cough, they look uncomfortable or warm.
I mean, there's some really vague general kind of things that could apply to a lot of different sicknesses.
But if you say, hey, if a doctor says, look, I think they have COVID, with or without a test, and they admit them in the hospital, they get money.
And then if they intubate them, they get more money.
And if they put it on their death certificate in Kentucky, with the first CARES Act, the bonus check was $297,000 per death certificate.
And so the doctors, I'm sure a lot of the hospital administrators are saying, well, these people are gone anyway.
And the numbers have been grossly exaggerated to promulgate this idea that there's an emergency and an epidemic and to push fear.
And then this vaccine comes along and it's not a vaccine and it's hurting people.
It's killing people.
It's maiming them.
It's paralyzing them.
It's giving them blood clots.
It's doing all kinds of things and we don't even know the full extent of the injuries.
So even when all of this becomes apparent to, let's say, a tipping point, a critical mass of the population, because the stillbirths have already begun.
We have a 2,900% increase in stillbirths in one region in Canada documented so far.
Spontaneous abortions among vaccinated pregnant women and so on.
As this plays out, it's only going to become more apparent.
At some point, it goes beyond a tipping point and they can't cover it up.
Yet...
The government has granted legal immunity to the vaccine manufacturers, but isn't it a core legal principle that such arrangements, if they are rooted in fraud, can be deemed null and void by the courts?
Is it possible we could nullify that fraud and actually hold the vaccine manufacturers accountable for the death and injury they've caused?
I think so.
I've told Hospital administrators who are leaning on that immunity, that the CDC told me to do it.
That kind of an argument didn't work very well in Nuremberg.
And it's definitely, they don't get liability for intentional torts.
When you harm somebody on purpose, when you suppress information and you bully and coerce them into taking something without their informed consent, that's nothing more than an experiment.
You do it on purpose knowing it's going to hurt them.
There's no question that you don't get immunity for that.
The kind of thing they would get immunity for is, let's say these vaccines really were helpful, and a hospital had three vaccines, and two of them, and they had, I'm sorry, yeah, they had three vaccines, and they needed to give them to four people.
And so they took the three highest risk because they didn't have four vaccines.
They only had three.
They needed to serve four people, and they chose one person who was at lower risk than the others and said, okay, you don't get one, the other three do, and then the one who didn't get it died.
They would be affected at some level because that was an appropriate discretionary choice.
They analyzed the risk factors and they helped who they could.
They might get immunity for that.
But knowing they're harming people, forcing them to take the vaccines, and then when you go to the hospital telling them they have COVID pneumonia and they're putting them on remdesivir.
For crying out loud, remdesivir killed 60% of the people it was tested on back during the Ebola stuff.
And it's It's just killing.
They're murdering people in hospitals, and they know it.
Maybe not every doctor, maybe not every nurse, but it's known.
It's understood.
Remdesivir is an emergency use authorization drug.
It's killing people.
They don't have COVID pneumonia.
They're putting them in REMs.
I personally went to try to help a nurse at a hospital in Kentucky.
I was at the hospital for 11 hours, and I said to them, We want to know what you've put her on.
She came into the hospital and said, every year I get bronchial pneumonia.
I've got it now.
I'm dehydrated.
I need some fluids.
I need some antibiotics.
They said, no, dear, you have COVID pneumonia.
We're going to get you on some remdesivir.
She said, no, don't give me that stuff.
Don't give me that stuff.
They said, just calm down.
It'll be all right.
They put her in a room.
They put remdesivir in her.
She thought she was getting fluids.
And then they left her alone for nine hours.
Her room was directly across from the nurse's station.
And she rang for help all night long.
She didn't get it in the morning.
They said, wow, you're really dehydrated.
She said, yeah, I've been calling for help all night.
Well, let us take care of that.
They put another bag of Remdesivir and locked her up for nine more hours.
And I said, tell us what she's on.
They said, well, we don't print that stuff out.
When she's discharged, we'll give her a printout and she'll get to see everything we gave her.
I said, no, it doesn't work that way.
She's a free American citizen.
She wants to know what you're giving her and she wants to have input and she's entitled to.
They stonewalled me for 11 hours and then they called security to throw me out and I called the police.
And we eventually got her off the remdesivir, but she died in that hospital and she had worked for the hospital as a neonatal nurse for almost 30 years.
So what you're describing, it's just extraordinary.
I mean, it sounds like medical kidnapping, medical terrorism.
But your story is not unique.
I've heard dozens of similar examples, and I know your phone's probably ringing off the hook, and Thomas Wren's as well, with hundreds of such, if not thousands, across the country where hospitals are, they've become these totalitarian murder centers.
Just oblivious, and I do not understand how the The nurse practitioners or the physicians can sit there and literally just condemn people to death by their own hands and live with themselves.
Yet this is happening all across the country.
It's extraordinary.
It's extraordinary and I don't have words for it.
It's shocking, it's distressing, it's horrific and it's murder and it's deliberate and it's happening everywhere right now.
So We're just about out of time for this interview, but in wrapping this up, give us your big picture assessment of where this goes.
I mean, by God, are we able to stop this hospital homicide and return to some semblance of sanity here?
When does this end?
Mike, I'm hearing from nurse groups all around the country that are standing up against this.
I honestly think that things are beginning to unravel for The forces of darkness who are pushing these things, they're starting to unravel.
Thomas Renz and I put an affidavit into our Alabama case from a whistleblower whose career has been to create algorithms and extrapolate medical data.
And they said even within the VAERS system, which we think represents only about 1% of actual harm, even within the VAERS system, they're hiding, by a factor of five, The reports that are actually coming in.
So when they're saying there's 9,000 people that have been killed within three days of taking the jab, the number is actually 40,000 plus.
The numbers are coming out.
We have whistleblowers appearing.
I think that things are unraveling for them.
And I honestly believe there is hope.
People need to understand also that the numbers of vaccinated folks are being greatly exaggerated by the media as part of the attempt to coerce.
The numbers are far fewer than they would have us believe.
We have to speak up in the places where we live.
We have to stand for truth.
Don't let the lies get a foothold.
We have to stand for truth.
We have to speak up.
We have to encourage each other.
People find their courage when they hear someone else exercising theirs.
But hope is not lost.
Okay, well, that's really a relief to hear.
And we all thank you for being on the front lines of the legal battle that stands before us right now.
And it's people like you and Thomas Renz and so many others who are going to turn this thing around on the legal front, because if we don't turn it around on the legal front, there's going to be a revolution or something.
You know, I mean, the rule of law is our last hope to restore civil rights and human dignity in this nation.
Mike, I agree with that, but I have to say that what you're doing is as critical because the work that Thomas and I do, it has to have a voice.
And your platform, The awareness that you're bringing to these issues, it's so critical.
I spend a lot of time on your content, and I feel like I can't even keep up with all of the great stuff that you're doing.
And I'm very, very thankful because without voices like yours to talk about what we're doing, people wouldn't know.
And it's so much easier when things are silenced by the media.
It's a lot easier for evil to have its way.
Well, you're exactly right, and thank you for those comments, and that's why I built this platform, and we have Brighteon.tv.
Thomas Renz is a host there.
He's got his own show there, and many others are joining us, and we're even launching Brighteon Radio next year.
A little teaser for those of you watching.
But, Mike, this is about having the multitude of voices rising up, the doctors, the whistleblowers, the attorneys, Everybody.
You know, the firefighters.
People who know what's happening.
And I'm just overjoyed by the fact that I'm not a lone voice in the woods on this issue.
You know, it's all of humanity that's awake is rising up right now.
And it's so obvious what's happening.
So we are not alone.
In fact, we are probably the majority.
And we have God on our side to boot, right?
So...
That's all we need.
Mike, I want to thank you for joining me today.
It's been an honor speaking with you here.
I want to mention your website again, cornerstoneattorney.com.
And any final thoughts before we wrap this up?
Mike, it's great to be here.
I want to thank you for having me on and for the work that you're doing.
Keep at it.
I guess I would say to people, you have to ask yourself, why are we going after the first responders?
Why are we going after the military workers?
Why are we going after the healthcare workers?
If you wanted to decimate the strength and the heart of America, you'd attack the policemen, the firefighters, the healthcare workers.
And so the marketplace of ideas was suppressed first.
Now the lifeblood of America is being attacked.
And we have to understand that the entire world is looking at us.
And we're a bastion of freedom.
Our way of life has done more to improve humanity throughout the world.
Than any other set of ideas.
And Marxism and communism has done more to impoverish humanity than any other set of ideas.
And that's the battle that we're in.
Freedom versus communism.
And we have to stand strong.
Well said.
Thank you, Mike.
Well, yeah, thank you, Mike.
And thank all of you for watching today.
And as usual, feel free to repost this interview on other platforms or other channels.
And we thank you for your support of Brighteon and this platform that continues to expand.
So God bless everyone watching today.
And Mike Hamilton, God bless you as well.
Thank you for your work.
And have a great day, everybody.
We're going to win this.
Just hang strong, okay?
We're going to get through this together.
I'm Mike Adams, founder of Brighteon.
God bless you and take care.
God bless you and take care.
scenario.
I'm Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, and I'm the author of Survival Nutrition.
I founded and run a multi-million dollar food science laboratory, and I'm the author of the best-selling science book, Food Forensics.
I'm also a prepper, a patriot, and a survivalist.
I can teach you how to survive what's coming by growing your own food, medicine, and antibiotics that can help keep you healthy and alive even during the worst of times.
At survivalnutrition.com, you'll be able to instantly download the full free audiobook as MP3 files.
▲
Export Selection