COVID19 Fraud - Fauci, Daszak, Gates, stand charged for Nuremberg Violations.

"The brief" can say what it likes. Until such time as a court actually accepts it as a case, it's just a piece of paper with lots of words.

 

No, the fact that Ms Rose sent her "case" to the ICC doesn't mean charges have been filed. It doesn't even mean the case has been filed. This is what the acknowledgment of receipt letter says:

"Please note this acknowlegment letter does not mean an investigation has been opened,
nor that an investigation will be opened by the Office of the Prosecutor."
​

 

dup

 

You really dont have any understanding how courts/legal process works I see.
It takes, days, weeks or months to get to judgment, you seem to think everything happens the moment of filing...and its very clear you do not understand legal language shees

 

Check the website and see if it has any credibility:

https://hannahroselaw.co.uk/

If you think it does, I have a bridge to sell you....

 

So why wasn't Trump named? His operation Warp Speed cut testing time and normal red tape to deliver the vaccine. Smells like a partisan
political case more than an actual case of law.

 

How am I supposed to know what to believe any more than you do?
That would mean the reporting source is also fraudulent
Your link doesnt prove anything one way or the other, admittedly though nothing would surpise me!

 

Goofball thread..

 

thats actually a very good point!
Im nonpartisan, I hate'em all equally, one party is as corrupt as the other

 

Clearly, you don't understand how it works - your thread title asserts that they've been charged. They haven't. Ms Rose has sent in her word document (because that's what it is) and the ICC has sent back a letter acknowledging receipt. No case is filed. No one's been charged with anything. A document's been sent and received. That's it.

 

yes that is what courts do, they send a receipt of acknowledgement with the assignment of a case number OTP-CR-473/21.

 

The horse in this emoji is the thread you started.

 

That's not a case number. It's a reference number.

And have you forgotten already what it says in the letter with that number?

"Please note this acknowledgment letter does not mean an investigation has been opened,
nor that an investigation will be opened by the Office of the Prosecutor."

 

Of course we do! Your article stated that they have been accused by the ICC, but no details provided as yet. I was throwing out the question as to why people thought the Gates were included.

 

Nice attempt to fake everyone out!

"As soon as a 'decision' is reached, we will inform you, in writing, and provide you with reasons for the 'decision'."

Seems you just happened to forget to mention the very next line, that a "decision" will be made, courts decide and make 'decisions' on cases, brought before the court not letters.

.

 

Wait. Back up. I thought that meant all the judges are evil and corrupt. That's been the word on the street since November 2020.

All joking aside, I find that documents like these are just designed to stir people up. What better way than to add a bunch of names and hot topics like Nuremberg, etc.?

Plus, Fauci has served in 6 presidents. He lied to us straight out the gate about no need for masks (yes, to save the limited supply for frontline workers but still) when COVID made its touchdown in the US. Nobody paying attention thinks he's not a question dodger and liar. That clearly equates to longevity in politics.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/02/health/gallery/anthony-fauci/index.html

 

Sen Kaine asked a direct question to compare the unvaccinated to the vaccinated, and he dodged one part and falsely represented unvaccinated people since they only have data on unvaccinated people for those who were ill enough to be forced into the hospital, not the millions who got it and got over it, never reporting anything to any hospital. Of course they have plenty of data on those vaxed and that incredibly skews the numbers in favor of the vax. Total fraud at its despotic finest. https://www.c-span.org/video/?517046-1/senate-hearing-federal-response-covid-19-variants

 

First off, its not "my article"
secondly, no where does it say the court 'accused' or 'charged' them.
thirdly, its not possible for anyone to know every fact for every possible question you can dream up. (everyone knows charges are brought 'to the court' by the plaintiff not the court)
fourth, you did not cite anything showing the ICC is doing the accusing as you claim to have read it.
Looks to me like you didnt read it and instead drew a pile of assumptions without actually reading it?

 

From your OP:
In a stunning 46-page legal filing to the International Criminal Court on December 6, an intrepid attorney and seven applicants accused Anthony Fauci, Peter Daszak, Melinda Gates, William Gates III, and twelve others of numerous violations of the Nuremberg Code. These included various crimes against humanity and war crimes as defined by the Rome Statutes, Articles 6, 7, 8, 15, 21, and 53.

 

that is not "the court", that is the plaintiff(s) jointly, they applied to the court for a decision, the court issues a case number and decides the merits of their complaint.

 

Correct. It was filed with the ICC, and I suppose we will know in time what comes of it. But if it is only a filing and not court action as yet, as you are contending, this is all a non issue. If that's so, why did you post it? You don't seem to be supporting it or justifying it...

 

Anything placed before a court for a decision 'is' a court action! Even if it gets dismissed!
Gates was involved monetarily, I gave you the connection I know of today, you seem to think I am the court and have all the evidence laid before me and can spit out every detail for every possible question you cook up. I am not the court, the complaint was not filed with me, therefore all the evidence was not filed with me.

 

So? I do not agree with many things they give to and stand for but how those this verify a conspiracy?

 

if 2 or more people work together and do something that is in violation of the law it is a conspiracy.

 

Nonsense! The letter states that they will give consideration to the "communication", that acknowledgment of it's receipt does not mean an investigation has been opened, and that they will be in touch when a decision is reached.

It's clear as day - to anyone but the wilfully ignorant - that "decision" refers to whether or not they decide to take any action further to receiving the communication.

Note also, that ICC cases are preceded by investigations, which are preceded by a preliminary examination of whether there should be an investigation.