Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Missouri sues China over Wuhan coronavirus spread

Missouri sues China over Wuhan coronavirus spread

If China did have to defend the lawsuit, it would take the same approach as Democrats: It’s mostly Trump’s fault, not China’s. On this issue, the Democrats and Communist Chinese read from the same page. Maybe China will call Joe Biden as its first witness.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC0gww2yznI

The State of Missouri, through its Attorney General Eric Schmitt, has sued the government of China, the Communist Party of China, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and several other Chinese entities over the damage from the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic. You can read the Complaint here.

I’d like to see the government of China and the officials responsible for the cover-up, concealment, and lies that allowed what could have been a local issue to spread around the world, pay for what they did. I doubt this lawsuit will achieve that goal.

China committed a crime against the world. There isn’t a single person reading this who hasn’t been affected.

But I am skeptical that such a lawsuit will obtain justice and/or retribution. The answer is political and economic, not judicial. We need to reduce our dependency on Chinese manufacturing, we need to build coalition to slow China’s aggressive push for world domination, and we need to emphasize rebuilding the American economy.

Most of all, we need to encourage the good people in China to end the tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party, which is responsible for more deaths, mostly of Chinese people, than all the other genocidal regimes combined.

In a press release, the Attorney General described the lawsuit:

In a historical move, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt filed a lawsuit today against the Chinese government, Chinese Communist Party, and other Chinese officials and institutions, alleging that their actions to suppress information, arrest whistleblowers, and deny the contagious nature of the 2019 novel Coronavirus led to loss of life and severe economic consequences in Missouri.

 “COVID-19 has done irreparable damage to countries across the globe, causing sickness, death, economic disruption, and human suffering. In Missouri, the impact of the virus is very real – thousands have been infected and many have died, families have been separated from dying loved ones, small businesses are shuttering their doors, and those living paycheck to paycheck are struggling to put food on their table,” said Attorney General Schmitt. “The Chinese government lied to the world about the danger and contagious nature of COVID-19, silenced whistleblowers, and did little to stop the spread of the disease. They must be held accountable for their actions.”

The lawsuit, filed this morning in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, alleges, “During the critical weeks of the initial outbreak, Chinese authorities deceived the public, suppressed crucial information, arrested whistleblowers, denied human-to-human transmission in the face of mounting evidence, destroyed critical medical research, permitted millions of people to be exposed to the virus, and even hoarded personal protective equipment (“PPE”)—thus causing a global pandemic that was unnecessary and preventable.”

According to the lawsuit, by late December, Chinese health officials had serious evidence of human-to-human transmission. Despite this evidence of human-to-human transmission, Chinese health officials did not report the outbreak to the World Health Organization until December 31. When Chinese authorities did inform the WHO of the outbreak, they denied the potential for human-to-human transmission.

The lawsuit also alleges that, despite having knowledge of the disease, Chinese officials did little to contain the spread. According to data gathered by the New York Times, nearly 175,000 individuals left Wuhan on January 1 alone to travel for the Lunar New Year. The Chinese government also continued with New Year celebrations, despite the risk for potential further infections.

Chinese officials’ alleged coverup and silencing of whistleblowers is also noted in the lawsuit. On January 1 or 2, Wuhan police stated in a message that was broadcast across the country on CCTV that they had taken “legal measures” against eight people who published and shared “rumors” online. One of those eight is believed to be a doctor that shared information about the disease on a platform called WeChat. One doctor in a Wuhan hospital emergency room was disciplined for instructing staff to wear masks, suspecting human-to-human transmission.

The lawsuit notes the immense negative impact that COVID-19 has had on Missourians, pointing out the unprecedented number of jobless claims, the impact on Missouri’s unemployment rate, and the impact on the State’s budget now and in the future. On the human side – Missouri’s nurses and doctors are forced to quarantine from their families, our elderly citizens are stuck in nursing homes away from loved ones, and more.

The lawsuit seeks relief on one count of public nuisance, one count of abnormally dangerous activities, and two counts of breach of duty. Remedies could include civil penalties and restitution, abatement of the public nuisance, cessation of abnormally dangerous activities, punitive damages, and more.

The key factual allegations can be found here.

Here is the introductory and summary paragraph from the Complaint:

1. In this case, the State of Missouri seeks recovery for the enormous loss of life, human suffering, and economic turmoil experienced by all Missourians from the COVID-19 pandemic that has disrupted the entire world.
An appalling campaign of deceit, concealment, misfeasance, and inaction by
Chinese authorities unleashed this pandemic. During the critical weeks of the
initial outbreak, Chinese authorities deceived the public, suppressed crucial
information, arrested whistleblowers, denied human-to-human transmission
in the face of mounting evidence, destroyed critical medical research,
permitted millions of people to be exposed to the virus, and even hoarded
personal protective equipment—thus causing a global pandemic that was
unnecessary and preventable. Defendants are responsible for the enormous
death, suffering, and economic losses they inflicted on the world, including
Missourians, and they should be held accountable.

Professor Jonathan Turley has identified some possible legal obstacles to getting China to pay anything:

The single advantage to private litigation is that it comes with evidentiary discovery if that is even allowed. Such lawsuits are exceptionally difficult, and China is known for blocking depositions and document disclosures. At least four class action lawsuits have recently been filed in the United States. One lawsuit claims the coronavirus was designed as a biological weapon, an allegation that both experts and intelligence officials have rejected. All of the lawsuits allege intentional or negligent acts.

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 extends blanket immunity to countries from most lawsuits in the United States. The exceptions are rather narrow and rarely accepted by American courts, which read this statute as clearly conveying the intent to discourage such lawsuits. The United States can be sued just as easily in foreign courts and thus favors immunity as the general rule. The most common exception under this law concerns commercial activities by foreign nations. For that reason, some lawsuits have stretched the facts to suggest that the wet market or lab in Wuhan were commercial enterprises effectively run or directed by China. That argument is likely to be far too attenuated for the courts.

One legal question could turn on Congress. In 2008, a lawsuit with some interesting analogies was filed against Saudi Arabia over the financing of the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. The kingdom had been accused of effectively releasing terrorists, rather than a virus, but the courts rejected those claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Congress then amended it to allow for such lawsuits with the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. President Obama vetoed it, but Congress overrode his veto. It is possible that Congress could do so again for this virus, which has now cost tens of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars in losses.

Hofstra Law School Professor Julian Ku had this relevant Twitter thread:

There are lots of jurisdictional obstacles facing this lawsuit; the main one being that the Chinese govt is generally immune under US law from lawsuits in US courts. But the Missouri AG has tried some interesting attempts here to get around this law.

1) Missouri suing not just Chinese govt entities, but the Chinese Communist Party itself, which may not be entitled to immunity since it is technically not part of the Chinese state. So even if all of the other Chinese govt entities get immunity, the CCP may not.

2)As @edswaine notes, Missouri is trying to invoke the commercial activity exception to sovereign immunity, alleging that the nefarious Chinese govt acts themselves “commercial activities” that have a direct effect on the U.S. (this seems pretty tough to prove, factually).

3) Missouri is also alleging that the Chinese govt acts were noncommercial torts, which is also exempted from sovereign immunity. This seems at odds with their claim that China is acting in a commercial way w/r/t the virus, but alternative argmts are a litigator’s best friend.

4) Assuming it gets past the immunity obstacles, Missouri is invoking its sovereign powers to sue for a “public nuisance”, which is a potentially very broad cause of action used to force opioid manufacturers to settle recently….

5) I am not optimistic about the Missouri’s chances here given the very tough jurisdictional obstacles this lawsuit is facing. But it does pose, in a very pointed way, some totally legitimate qs for the Chinese govt. Not sure I love using US courts to pose those questions tho…

6) Another inside-baseball point: Will the Chinese govt appear in court to file a motion to dismiss? Almost certainly, yes (although in has sometimes just demanded the US govt appear on its behalf, or file a letter on its behalf). Would @SecPompeo or Barr do that?

7) Another inside-baseball point: will the Chinese Communist Party hire its own counsel to represent it, since it does have a slightly different argument to make here? Or will the Chinese govt’s lawyers claim that the CCP is an arm of the Chinese govt and entitled to immunity?

8) Final inside-baseball point: Which big-time US law firm will take on the Chinese Communist Party as their client? Jones Day? Sidley? Let the beauty contest begin!

9) Final, final point: Missouri’s lawsuit may be used to marshal even more support in the US Congress for lifting the Chinese govt’s immunity. Is it a coincidence that Missouri’s junior senator @HawleyMO has introduced a bill to do just that?

The lawsuit is unlikely to survive a motion to dismiss, at least against the government of China. If China did have to defend the lawsuit, it would take the same approach as Democrats: It’s mostly Trump’s fault, not China’s.

On this issue, the Democrats and Communist Chinese read from the same page. Maybe China will call Joe Biden as its first witness.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

What a cynical misuse of the legal system for his own personal aggrandizement. “The lawsuit, filed this morning in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri”. This obviously makes exactly as much sense as Hubei filing suit against Missouri in the Chinese District Court for the South-western District of Hubei.

We can easily imagine how he would react to that — he’d be all indignant and proclaim, correctly, that the State of Missouri is not subject to the Chinese court’s jurisdiction, that it refuses on principle to respond to such a piece of garbage, any orders from that court will be shredded unread, and its judges can go soak their heads. Well, of course the Chinese will, correctly, take the same attitude to the Missouri court.

Which makes this a chutzpah not only against the purported defendant but against the US court which is being used in such a manner just to get the AG some publicity. I hope the US court throws it out with sanctions.

    George_Kaplan in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2020 at 8:35 pm

    Very few people will hear if any lawsuit is lodged in the ‘District Court for the South-western District of Hubei’. Then there is the matter of residencywhere the crime occurred. Since Missouri suffered as a result of China’s actions that’s where the lawsuit is being lodged. Beijing has already disclaimed responsibility, and as a one party state it’s pretty much impossible to imagine that a lawsuit in China would progress anywhere. Only in America is a fair outcome possible.

      Milhouse in reply to George_Kaplan. | April 21, 2020 at 8:48 pm

      The crime occurred in China, not in Missouri. And very few people in China will hear about a lawsuit in the “U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri” either. My point is that it is as much of a chutzpah to sue China in a Missouri court as it would be to sue Missouri in a Hubei court. A suit that is illegitimate from the beginning cannot possibly reach a fair outcome, by definition.

      I mean, it’s not as if the facts are in dispute. Sure, the Chinese deny them, but nobody takes that seriously. There’s no question that the Chinese are guilty, but a Missouri court still has no business sitting in judgment over a “defendant” that is more important than it.

        Close The Fed in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2020 at 8:54 pm

        And of course, here we have Milhouse ignoring Congressional precedent.

        Maybe this suit fails, and maybe then Congress amends it. Good idea? Not the point; the point is, Congress could change the law following an unsuccessful suit. There would certainly be SENTIMENT behind the idea.

        Quoting from above:

        One legal question could turn on Congress. In 2008, a lawsuit with some interesting analogies was filed against Saudi Arabia over the financing of the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. The kingdom had been accused of effectively releasing terrorists, rather than a virus, but the courts rejected those claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Congress then amended it to allow for such lawsuits with the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. President Obama vetoed it, but Congress overrode his veto. It is possible that Congress could do so again for this virus, which has now cost tens of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars in losses.

          notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Close The Fed. | April 21, 2020 at 9:39 pm

          It would be fun to see them get their assets Frozen off.

          Milhouse in reply to Close The Fed. | April 21, 2020 at 9:53 pm

          Congress has no right to allow such suits in US courts at all. It may have the power, but it has no right.

          And any attempt to seize Chinese assets would just mean the Chinese would seize American assets in return. That’s what the US would do if the Chinese pulled a stunt like this on us, so why shouldn’t they do the same?

          Close The Fed in reply to Close The Fed. | April 22, 2020 at 5:42 am

          Milhouse, bite me.

          You write as though your parents gave you a throne when you were three.

          Milhouse in reply to Close The Fed. | April 22, 2020 at 4:31 pm

          You tell me where Congress got a right to give a US court jurisdiction over a foreign country. Where did Congress get a right to make laws for people in foreign countries? Do you think China has a right to make laws for you, and to sue you in its courts if you ignore them? If not then what’s the difference?

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to George_Kaplan. | April 21, 2020 at 11:28 pm

      Also time for citizens to sue criminal states such as CA, NY, MI etc……

      Someboth…Tell the Governor That California Is Re-Opening With or Without Him

      https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/somebody-should-tell-the-governor-that-california-is-re-opening-with-or-without-him/

    zennyfan in reply to Milhouse. | April 21, 2020 at 11:21 pm

    Self-aggrandizement? Rather like the state attorneys general suing Chevron, I’d say.

      Milhouse in reply to zennyfan. | April 22, 2020 at 12:34 am

      I’m not sure which Chevron suit you’re referring to. Maybe you’re referring to the Global Warmening suits against all the big oil companies. But in that case I would say it’s the exact opposite.

      In those cases the suits were without merit, but they were brought before courts that had the right to hear them (and correctly dismiss them).

      In this case the suit against China is completely meritorious; there’s no question that China has done all that Missouri alleges, and has caused the damage complained of. But the court before which it was brought has no right to hear it. Unfortunately there is no court that has the right to hear it.

    redc1c4 in reply to Milhouse. | April 22, 2020 at 12:59 am

    just curious:

    how much are the ChiComs paying you to carry their water?

    or do you have no moral standards at all?

    asking for everyone else here on the blog…

      Milhouse in reply to redc1c4. | April 22, 2020 at 5:56 pm

      No, you’re not asking for everyone else, you don’t speak for anyone but your own miserable self. You have the hide to speak of moral standards?! Not only do you have none, or any integrity, but you don’t even know what those words mean. How dare you accuse me of “carrying the ChiComs’ water”? I have never done so, and never will, unlike you, who apparently will do anything for pay.

      Here’s something you may never have heard before: DECENT PEOPLE do not determine their positions based on whose ox is gored. HONEST PEOPLE say what they actually believe to be true, regardless of whose interests it helps or harms. They don’t need to be paid to tell the truth, they don’t accept pay to tell falsehoods, and they only carry water when someone is thirsty or something is on fire. Such as your pants.

      This is clearly a foreign concept to you. You judge everything not by whether it’s true but by whom it helps. You have never contributed anything of value to this forum; all you ever do is spill your venom. As Trump likes to say, sad.

    Regardless of the legal realities of this lawsuit’s chances for success in court, it could be the beginning of an avalanche of such lawsuits in the US and then around the world. That would then create the required pressure for action by a world united against China. It has to start somewhere.

    We used to just go to war. The struggle to avoid their day of reckoning in a global court setting would drain China’s ability and willingness to fight. Let’s get the train rolling.

Close The Fed | April 21, 2020 at 8:23 pm

I agree, I would be surprised to see a suit against China in U.S. courts succeed.

But, I respectfully disagree about the “good people” in China. They aren’t Christians. They aren’t western. They torture dogs and probably cats and bears, and whatever other animals they eat, in order to make them “taste better.”

I’ve seen some of the video. Shocking, utterly shocking. And zero sanitation concerns. ZERO. Blood all over the floor, dead animals laying on top of each other, I mean I could go on and on.

Frankly, I just don’t have much use for the Chinese and I certainly have no use for their CULTURE.

    George_Kaplan in reply to Close The Fed. | April 21, 2020 at 8:39 pm

    Not every Chinaman is good true, but neither is every American. This article called for the good people in China to end Beijing’s tyranny, it doesn’t assume everyone is good.

    Then there’s the fact that standards differ. Beijing doesn’t inspire a high degree of ethics, and Imperial China committed some shocking atrocities, but their civilisation did achieve some amazing things. Might want to be careful lest your criticism of a foreign culture veer into being perceived as racism.

      Close The Fed in reply to George_Kaplan. | April 21, 2020 at 8:57 pm

      George, call me a racist. Just say it. I don’t give a damn.

      If you can’t see the differences between Christian culture and their culture, you’re a man that needs new glasses.

      Can you imagine how most Americans would react if you took their DOGS, beat them with a heavy stick, and then killed them with a blowtorch, and THEN threw them on top of 50 other dogs killed in a similar fashion?

      Remember the football player who tortured the dogs? That’s America’s reaction to animal cruelty.

      Did you know we have a department of agriculture charged with checking the sanitation of our food processing?

      Visit the 21st Century. It’s a thing.

Back in the late 60’s when the Cowboys were really strong a friend of mine in the Navy from Waxahachie told me “Dallas and 6 is good against Red China!”.

They had Roger Staubach and Walt Garrison, though.

I don’t give Missouri much of a shot.

LOL

Maybe China will call Joe Biden as its first witness.

Then they’d better get a move on. It won’t be long before Biden will be unable to distinguish between China and Chia-Pet.

Well, since our local and state politicians shutdown the US economy and destroyed the businesses, life savings and lives of their constituents, can we file a class actions suit against them for damages due to incompetence?

Look, this lawsuit is designed to shift the blame from the people who destroyed the US economy, the state and local governments, to the Chinese. This a lawyer’s way of arguing that, though his client is an incompetent boob, he is only an incompetent boob because he relied upon incompetent information from another party. So, it is the other party’s fault, not the faulg of the incompetent boob client.

    Conservative Beaner in reply to Mac45. | April 21, 2020 at 10:09 pm

    I can see it now. Chairman Xi will claim it wasn’t his fault the President acted on bad information from Doctor Fauci and Doctor Birx.

    Watch judges appointed by the Globalists Clinton, Bush and Obama who will try to block any suit Missouri tries to throw at them.

    Watch Wall Street step up with friendly support to keep manufacturing in China.

Isn’t Missouri the “Show me the money state?

Dantzig93101 | April 21, 2020 at 9:56 pm

I don’t know if the Chinese government is guilty of offenses alleged in the suit. Assume it is. What should our goal be?

I think our goal should be to prevent (or at least seriously decrease the probability) of similar events in the future.

The Chinese aren’t going to change. They are what they are. It is beyond our power to turn them into Lockean devotees of human rights. Then what’s the most effective way to achieve our goal? Lawsuits like this one seem counter-productive.

Under current law, not much chance of survival. As a wedge to put public pressure on Congress to modify the law…then maybe. As another move it could be that the plaintiffs expect that Congress and the Administration don’t want to modify sovereign immunity and will thus put pressure back to the court to take another look at the commercial aspect of the suit.

If the defendant is not the PRC, but instead the Chinese communist party, well that ain’t a sovereign defendant. Another aspect are the actions of Chinese corporations who bought up PPE etc in Australia and other nations then shipped it to the PRC.

The public nuisance claim is going to stick, but against what defendant? If the PRC isn’t the defendant then what kind of argument can the PRC make? Is a court going to rule that everything to do with the communist party of the PRC is the sovereign?

If so what does that mean for any multinational corporation with operations in the PRC? Since these companies have to cooperate with the communist party to do business in the PRC does that mean the immunity of the PRC extends to their operations in the PRC? Logically that is the next step in trying to dismiss based on a ‘its all China baby and you can’t sue China’ argument.

I realize that was kind of stream of consciousness but the more I think about this the more I like the plaintiffs chances. IMO give it 80/20 against, for now.

another lawsuit to keep an eye on is in Wisconsin, dealing with a teen that went to Disney world in Florida, put an account of her encounter with a possible Wuhan virus infection, and how the sheriff’s department allegedly threatened to arrest her and her parent if she did not take it down.

    Milhouse in reply to ronk. | April 22, 2020 at 12:37 am

    I’m not sure it’s a lawsuit to watch, because I think it’s going to settle quickly. As I understand it the only defense the sheriff has is to deny that he ever threatened them, and insist he merely asked politely for the post to be taken down.

      maxmillion in reply to Milhouse. | April 22, 2020 at 12:50 am

      Why?

        Milhouse in reply to maxmillion. | April 22, 2020 at 4:32 am

        Why what? Why will it settle? Because denying the whole thing is his only possible defense. Unless the county lawyer thinks he can convince a jury that the plaintiffs imagined the threats, and that the sheriff merely made a polite request, the county is going to lose. So I think it’s going to settle.

        Further, if it doesn’t settle and the lawyer goes with that defense it still won’t be a case to watch, because it will turn entirely on the facts. Either the plaintiffs are lying or the defendant is. That’s not interesting. There’s no question of law, there’s no defense for what the plaintiffs allege happened, so who cares how it turns out?

      redc1c4 in reply to Milhouse. | April 22, 2020 at 1:02 am

      i knew we could count on you to defend the indefensible…

      nice to see someone keeping their standards up during the ChiCom Crud crisis.

        redc1c4 in reply to redc1c4. | April 22, 2020 at 1:05 am

        PS: there are NO “polite” exceptions to the First Amendment for agents of the state, like Sheriffs.

        i would have thought that a legal genius like you would have already known that..

        my bad.

          Milhouse in reply to redc1c4. | April 22, 2020 at 4:28 am

          WTF are you on about now? If the sheriff did not threaten the family, and merely politely requested that the girl take down her post, then of course that’s a complete defense. How can you possibly deny that? Seriously. How could anyone imagine that this would be even slightly a problem? Where in the constitution or in any law does it say he can’t do that? I just don’t understand you at all. I already knew you have no morals, but are you stupid as well?

          Close The Fed in reply to redc1c4. | April 22, 2020 at 5:44 am

          Here he goes again…. Milhouse, I sincerely disbelieve this is the place or the time for the profanity of “WTF.”

          Grow up, quit insulting others.

          Milhouse in reply to redc1c4. | April 22, 2020 at 4:38 pm

          It is absolutely the place and time, when someone goes on an insane rant, ridiculously claiming that a sheriff is not allowed to make polite requests of people, just because he hates me.

      How about for once you propose an idea of your own? Or suggest a way to make someone else’s idea work? Why are you so committed to failure?

      I don’t know why you chose Milhouse as your moniker but it should be Homer. You seem to have embraced his motto.

      “Trying is the first step to failure. So why try?”
      —————- Homer Simspon

        CommoChief in reply to Pasadena Phil. | April 22, 2020 at 12:23 pm

        Yes Milhouse tends towards being dismissive but one he actually takes the time to offer more than a knee jerk no, his arguments are mostly well reasoned. That doesn’t mean I always agree, but Milhouse brings a viewpoint in his arguments that I value simply to bounce ideas back and forth with an intelligent person who holds differing views.

        As to the Disney, family v sheriff. Milhouse thinks it will settle. It will. No value to sheriff in going to trial. No value to Disney in allowing discovery to determine if they leaned on the sheriff or offered inducement to the sheriff.

        Sheriff behavior, guys cops can and do like as a part of their job. They are allowed to do so within certain parameters. If a cop tells you to stop doing something that is clearly a lawful activity and you voluntarily comply that’s on you. You allowed yourself to be intimidated he didn’t coerce you.

      ronk in reply to Milhouse. | April 22, 2020 at 2:22 pm

      you’ve made an assumption that the sheriff’s department are reasonable people, I don’t think so, I think they will fight this tooth and nail. this crisis has brought out the government leader with Napoleonic complexes, for a good example see the governor of Michigan, the other thing is they are using OPM(other peoples money) and I think it will hold true for this state/county/city bureaucrats. time will tell.

        Milhouse in reply to ronk. | April 22, 2020 at 4:41 pm

        It’s the county attorney that has to defend this, and unless he thinks a jury will believe that the plaintiff is lying, he will advise his client that the case cannot be defended and must be settled.

“Mr. Vice President, do you swear to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?”

“Anyway, about my washtub. I’d just used it that morning to wash my turkey, which in those days was known as a walking-bird. We’d always have walking-bird on Thanksgiving, with all the trimmings: cranberries, injun eyes, yams stuffed with gunpowder.”

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | April 22, 2020 at 2:18 am

Time to sue states and cities!

327 231 Cliff notes version of todays reporters: Shouldn’t the country stay closed forever?
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 21, 2020 06:55 PM (r+sAi)
********
It’s all about voting by mail.
Posted by: redridinghood at April 21, 2020 06:58 PM (wiXsO)

This is, in part, starting to become very crystal clear. Now here comes the parade of Hollywood idiots (Hanks and wife), along with notable Party faithfuls like Mooch, pushing for mail-in voting hard. It’s not by accident. All of us know their playbook.

Ace of Spades

The other part of Shutdown Panic and Economic Ruin for America is to take down Donald Trump. And it’s always icing on the cake when America gets kicked in the teeth.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital. | April 22, 2020 at 2:22 am

    Ibid.

    I’m telling you, once it becomes clear that 15-20 cities (granted, very large cities with huge populations) are holding back the rest of the entire USA, things are gonna change fast, politically.

. . . Granted. Okay, then, if not judicially, then how, what — war? nothing? figgeddabouditt?

What? damn it!

Germany, as it were, is occupying the Rhineland while we sleep. Japan, so to speak, is in Manchuria. It’s another day, but the same problem: there’s sure trouble in the offing.

Among other things, to be sure, the PPE component of the suit — and there’s still more to come w/r/t certain bad CPC actors’ hoarding the materiel and profiting bigly in the world market — is revolting, despicable, and, wait for it — a crime of commission against humanity, maybe? And there’s plenty of horrible omission on record to boot.

C’mon, France & Germany; get with it, say it! Let’s get some traction here. Short of a risky naval engagement, etc, we may be running out of civil or diplomatic or both options here.

Something must be done if we still want to call our species sapiens. Otherwise, the whole damn mess and its legacy will be on us, reduced to global human negligence — a failure to act when needed to save the species — in the year 2020.

Am I overstating the matter? Who wants more pathogenic, murdering microbes, or, along with or instead of that, nuclear fallout. Somehow, we’ve got to act against, neutralize, and socio-politically reconstitute the villain in our midst.

Reform, upon recognition of grave error, in PRC is urgently needed. Something, and it’ll no doubt turn out to be economic in nature — on a very comprehensive and holistic level — has to transpire, and soon.

I’m listening closely to anything contra that’s convincing.*

_____________________
* So not, then, from Uncle Joe, who, though one of PRC’s good friends and fellow readers/musicians/poets, heaven help us, is increasingly incoherent and incompetent, to join the obvious, present wit).

    Close The Fed in reply to GatorGuy. | April 22, 2020 at 5:49 am

    I believe the appropriate response is what Trump has been suggesting for a long time: decouple from China.

    Move our businesses out of there. Reestablish our own manufacturing. Kill China – not in the crib, because it’s too late – but in her destructive adulthood.

    She wants to eat bats and have an insecure virus lab, give it to her good and hard.

PS: As usual, I like and note well Professor Turley’s take:

“One legal question could turn on Congress. In 2008, a lawsuit with some interesting analogies was filed against Saudi Arabia over the financing of the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. The kingdom had been accused of effectively releasing terrorists, rather than a virus, but the courts rejected those claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Congress then amended it to allow for such lawsuits with the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. President Obama vetoed it, but Congress overrode his veto. It is possible that Congress could do so again for this virus, which has now cost tens of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars in losses.”

Maybe this year, President Trump? Maybe WHCOS Meadows, the Senate Majority Leader, and somehow, someway — hey, bring the contents of the whole damn freezer if you’d like to the Hill — the Speaker might be interested. This one’ll need a lot, a lot of legislative grease. ‘ Sounds almost too good to be true at this juncture, but who knows? . . .

waste of everyones time.
political stunt really.
think you all know my feelings on chinas involvement here, does not excuse wasting peoples time/resources with useless shit like this.
cannot be against a one world government type of system while using your own court systems to sue another government.
the only possible use of this is that if was ever shown that the viral release was purposeful fed government would have prior acknowledgment of harm doe to the individual states. course by then the states would back away so fast would leave a rip in the space-time fabric.
you get my drift.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend