Anonymous ID: 812d42 Dec. 9, 2024, 7:10 a.m. No.22135080   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5094 >>5294 >>5511 >>5576 >>5817 >>5830 >>5978

(Some information from the NY Times about Dr. Janette Nesheiwat, Donald J. Trump’s choice to be the next surgeon general. I would like to know what the Dr. thinks of the "vaccine" and "masking" now, considering she used her media exposure to spread medical misinformation related to Covid on FOX. Did she take the jab? What does she think about SV40 included in the jab? Is she going to push an anti gun agenda considering she accidently shot and killed her father?)

 

How Childhood Tragedy Shaped the Doctor Trump Picked for Surgeon General

 

New York Times

Dec 6, 2024

 

At the age of 13, Dr. Janette Nesheiwat said she accidentally knocked over a box in a darkened room. A handgun went off, leaving her father dead.

(Julia is the sister of Dr.Janette Nesheiwat. No wonder she came to be known the DJT.)

 

Julia Nesheiwat went on to serve as homeland security adviser to Mr. Trump during his first term as president. Before that, she had been an Army intelligence officer and later served as a deputy special presidential envoy who worked on securing the release of hostages held worldwide. She is married to Michael Waltz, a Florida congressman whom Mr. Trump recently picked to be his national security adviser.

She initially championed the Covid vaccines, calling them “a gift from God” in a Fox News opinion piece in February 2021. She urged everyone to wear a mask. “Even consider wearing two masks at the same time,” she wrote.

Dr. Nesheiwat spent her career far removed from major research institutions, hospitals or medical schools. Instead, she was a working urgent-care doctor who has spent much of her professional life at CityMD, a for-profit chain of clinics that have sprung up across New York City over the last 15 years. And near the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, Dr. Nesheiwat began regularly appearing on Fox News as a medical contributor.

Some doctors and health-care experts have raised concerns about urgent care clinics, noting that they could undermine the role of primary care doctors and efforts to focus on wellness and prevention.

 

But such clinics are here to stay. When Dr. Nesheiwat joined CityMD, the company had no more than a dozen locations in the city. Today it has more than 150 clinics in the region and logs about five million visits a year, according to Walgreens, which owns a controlling interest in the company.

 

https://archive.is/4swp9#selection-763.0-763.79

Anonymous ID: 812d42 Dec. 9, 2024, 7:59 a.m. No.22135305   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5396 >>5576 >>5817 >>5830 >>5978

Can Biden pardon a person or a group of people who have not been convicted of a crime? Must the pardon be specific to the person and the crime, or can Biden bestow a guarantee that a person or group of people may commit crimes with absolutely no legal consequences.

 

Seems like "the end of Democracy" to me. Dilution of the specificity requirement involving Presidential pardons opens the door for blanket, preemptive pardons.

 

The following link to an article discusses the issues clearly from both sides.

 

However, it was written specifically in anticipation of Trump giving blanket, non-specific pardons to his children and allies on December 17, 2020.

 

Are Blanket Pardons Constitutional? A Reply to Bowman

 

"If news reports are to be believed, President Trump is considering issuing blanket pardons (“for any and all offenses”) to many of his family-members and associates. In an article last year, I raised questions about the validity of such pardons, arguing that the Pardon Clause may be subject to a “specificity requirement,” a requirement that the President identify the specific offenses covered by the clemency order."

 

(excerpt) "The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the pardon power is subject to non-textual limitations. Although it has not offered an exhaustive list of these implicit limits, it has offered a methodology for identifying them. Namely, the scope of the pardon power must be based on the Framers’ intent at the time of the Constitution’s drafting. And as the Supreme Court has said, courts engaged in discerning that intent should look to English law during the founding period, since the framers “were conversant with the laws of England, and … both Englishmen and Americans attached the same meaning to the word pardon.” History, in short, should be our guide."

 

https://www.justsecurity.org/73900/are-blanket-pardons-constitutional-a-reply-to-bowman/