REVEALED: Jan 6 Commission FABRICATED Whereabouts of Willard Hotel ‘War Room’ Attendee in Subpoena

Evidence has revealed the January 6th Commission is lying in its subpoenas to leading right-wing figures.

Raheem J. Kassam reporting for The National Pulse

Tollbooth records belonging to former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik place him 300 miles away from the infamous January 5th meeting at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., with a legal letter (below) seen by The National Pulse accusing Rep. Bernie Thompson’s commission of fabricating the evidence.

Thompson’s Jan. 6th commission recently subpoenaed Kerik, a close associate of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Their letter asserted:

The Select Committee’s investigation and public accounts have revealed credible evidence of your involvement in the events within the scope of the Select Committee’s inquiry. You reportedly participated in a meeting on January 5, 2021 at the Willard Hotel in Washington D.C., in which Rudolph Giuliani, Stephen Bannon, John Eastman, and others discussed options for overturning the results of the November 2020 election such as, among other things, pressuring Vice President Pence not to certify the electoral college results…

Kerik’s lawyers at the Parlatore Law Group struck back Tuesday, however, insisting:

We knew from the time that we received the subpoena that this was a false allegation, as Mr. Kerik never participated in any such meeting. He wasn’t even in Washington DC, as he was in New York dealing with a family medical emergency. While we knew at the time that the claim was false, we later found out that it was actually a fabrication.

This passage in your letter had a footnote, citing two sources for this allegation, Bob Woodward’s book, Peril, as well as a Washington Post article. However, a review of both cites quickly demonstrates that no such allegation was ever made. The Washington Post article does discuss Mr. Kerik’s involvement in investigating fraud, but makes no mention of this alleged meeting, whereas Woodward’s book does not claim that Mr. Kerik was at the meeting. In fact, a text search of Woodward’s book reveals that the word “Kerik” isn’t even mentioned once.

Members of the January 6th commission claimed to have “credible evidence” proving that Kerik was at the Willard Hotel in Washington on January 5th. In fact, no such evidence exists, further underlining the farcical nature of the commission and its fishing exercise against leading right-wing figures.

Last week The National Pulse revealed the January 6th Commission chairman has decades-long ties to violent, secessionist groups, while others such as Elaine Luria and Adam Schiff have substantial ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

“The United States Congress puts out a press release and says that I’m going to be investigated, and I’m being subpoenaed, based on a meeting that I attended on Jan. 5th with Steve Bannon, Mayor Giuliani and Dr. Eastman and maybe some other people,” Kerik said in a statement.

“I was not at a meeting on Jan 5. [Bennie Thompson] made a false statement.” he continued.

In fact, the EZPASS toll payment system in Kerik’s vehicle showed he traveled north on the I-95 from Washington, D.C. the evening of Jan. 4th. He entered Delaware at or around 7:13pm that evening. At 8:36pm, Kerik took the last exit on the New Jersey Turnpike before entering the New York City suburbs, where he resides.

The following day, Jan. 5th when Kerik is alleged to be at the Willard Hotel near the White House, toll records show he was crossing the George Washington Bridge into Manhattan twice: once at 5:39am and again at 2:24pm.

Kerik left New York late on the night of Jan. 5th. He paid a toll in northern Maryland at 11:51pm, and his last between Maryland and Washington at 12:40am on Jan. 6th.

X22, Red Pill news, and more-Nov 30

 

Been busy today! Here's tonight's news:

On the Fringe:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/NRHdmXoyLPqX/

Tension high as China's influence in South Pacific region grows

Australia to send military aid as violent protests continue in the Solomon Islands and fresh concerns over lurking Chinese spy ships off the Australia's east coast

Alexandra Marshall reporting for Rebel News

Violent protests continue in the Solomon Islands after Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare resigned over accusations he strengthened ties with China at the expense of Taiwan which he said, ‘put him on the right side of history’.

Anti-government protesters have since set fire to buildings in Honiara and large crowds remain on the move through Chinatown.

Tensions escalated when the Solomon Islands broke diplomatic ties with Taiwan and formalised their relationship with China under Sogavare’s direction, which triggered an independence referendum in Malaita – the largest province in the Solomon Islands.

China offered $730 million in financial aid to the Solomon Islands provided they cut their thirty-six year diplomatic connection with Taiwan.

“We sincerely regret and strongly condemn the [Solomon Islands] government's decision to establish diplomatic relations with China,” said Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen.

Not everyone was happy with the decision. Malaita Province Premier Daniel Duidana has remained staunchly in favour of Taiwan after it provided Covid assistance, PPE, and food aid to the region allegedly against the new national law. Relations between the two nations have been on good terms.

Senior politicians also published a letter in 2019 condemning Sogavare’s switch to China.

“We believe the long-term interests of our country — in terms of our development aspirations, as well as respect for democratic principles, human rights, rule of law, human dignity, and mutual respect — lie with Taiwan, not the PRC. […] “We are aware of important lessons from many countries — including in our region — who are locked in a serious debt trap as a result of their giving in to China's lures.”

Pro-Taiwan protests broke out through Malaita, calling for independence from the pro-China government. The island has turned down China’s debt-trap diplomacy, rejecting infrastructure projects which have left other island nations in the Pacific with Chinese-occupied ports.

Australia has honoured its commitment to assist its Pacific neighbours by sending 23 Federal police, armed ADF units, and diplomats to urgently contain the situation earlier in the week.

“Our purpose here is to provide stability and security,” said Prime Minister Scott Morrison. “We have always been there to help our Pacific neighbours when they need us.”

The Prime Minister was careful not to pick sides as the internal political conflict plays out. Particularly, the Prime Minister may be wary of upsetting China.

The Solomon Islands remain a flashpoint in the Pacific against China’s diplomatic acquisition of satellite nations. Many other nations have quietly allowed China to build colossal infrastructure projects while leaders accepted money and gifts from the PRC. The end result has been the creation of militarily significant ports and bases scattered through Pacific nations under Chinese control.

It is the same process with India, where China has encircled its largest political threat (and one of Australia’s most important military allies) with Chinese assets including the vital deep water Hambantota port in Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan government was forced to hand over the port to China after it failed to make repayments on the Chinese debt, giving China full control of the port along with 15,000 acres of land causing a strategic nightmare for India.

Australia is certainly being watched.

A Chinese spy ship was caught lurking in the waters off Darwin for three weeks. Although it remained outside Australia’s waters and did not break any international laws, it appeared to be engaging in unfriendly activities as it followed the coast from Darwin to Sydney.

Minister for Defence Peter Dutton said that their purpose probably involved reconnaissance.

“They will be involved in intelligence collection, signals collection. They will be looking to survey different attributes and have that general presence,” said Mr Dutton.

A Chinese surveillance ship was also spotted off the coast of Queensland inside Australian waters, watching military exercises while the strategic Port of Darwin remains under a Chinese lease. In 2019, three Chinese warships sailed into Sydney Harbour unannounced during a tense political standoff regarding China’s (widely held to be unreasonable) claims over the South China Sea.

“The People’s Liberation Army has no intention to cause anyone trouble, but is not afraid to face up to troubles. Should anyone risk crossing the bottom line, the People’s Liberation Army will resolutely take action and defeat all enemies,” said a Chinese General to the Shangri La Dialogue forum, when asked about the warships.

Satellite images show China weaponizing the South China Sea with the transformation of reefs, islands, and atolls into military bases – most of these within disputed waters.

In recent months, armed Chinese military jets have been flying low over Taiwan and its waters. This is part of a general escalation of tension from the Communist regime in Beijing, which has set about reclaiming old territories in recent years.

China has either the largest naval force – or very close to it – after spending decades building up its fleet. Australia remains dependent on its allies, particularly the United States, to defend itself against military activity in the Pacific.

China broke binding international treaties several years ago when it reclaimed Hong Kong by force and has since imposed harsh laws and Chinese rule over the previously autonomous region, triggering a mass exodus into British territories. Before that, the world watched in horror as Tibet’s monasteries were burned and its holy lands looted. Today, Tibet and Xinjiang have controversial concentration camps to re-educate the population, while Tibet’s spiritual leader, the Dali Lama, remains in exile in India.

Taiwan is next on the agenda, with Beijing issuing threats to the independent nation and insisting that it will be folded back into China with military force if it refuses to give up its sovereignty voluntarily.

While the world could do little to help Hong Kong, Taiwan has been preparing for China’s invasion for generations and has turned the island nation into a military fortress that, according to experts, would take the largest naval activity in human history to successfully invade.

No one is sure if China is capable of taking Taiwan – including China – which may explain why Beijing has been trying to isolate Taiwan from its diplomatic allies.

China has also issued threats of nuclear war on Japan if it were to intervene in the Taiwan issue – which it almost certainly will – as Taiwan forms the gateway to Japan’s most important trade routes. Japan has committed itself to defending Taiwan with military force, while Europe and the United States have all moved warships into the Pacific in case China makes good on its threat.

While China spies on Australia with ships, we have voluntarily left them in possession of sensitive military data.

In February 2021, the Australian Federal government renewed its contract with Global Switch despite serious security concerns.

The company has hosted Australia’s sensitive and high-security Defence datafor some time. Originally a British company, Elegant Jubilee – a Chinese consortium – bought 49% of the parent company (Aldersgate Investments) causing an ownership change for Global Switch in 2016.

Then-Treasurer Scott Morrison said in 2017 that the Defence data would be shifted back to a government-owned hub for security reasons, but later decided to extend their contracts with Global Switch after he became Prime Minister.

“All our data centres provide our customers with world class reliability, security and flexibility,” said Global Switch’s group director for the Asia-Pacific Damon Reid. “Global Switch has no access to any customer data, we simply build and operate high-quality real estate with the right power, cooling and physical security, so that our customers are able to focus on their core IT requirements”

One thing remains certain, China flexing its new military strength in the Pacific region at a time when Australia is at its weakest.

The Twin Pillars of Biden’s Failure

Biden and his followers and minders will 

go down because of these two issues.

by Conrad Black for American Greatness

Everything has gone so terribly wrong for the Biden Administration, and in the ways that were widely predicted, that it is hard to believe Joe Biden could be perceived as a successful or at least potentially successful president if only he had avoided being such a tool of the Democratic extreme Left. On the afternoon of his inauguration, he killed the Keystone XL Pipeline and curtailed fracking and offshore oil and gas exploration, and ordered the end of construction of the southern border wall. The consequences have been over 200,000 illegal migrants entering the United States across the southern border most months and the rise in the price of gasoline from approximately $2 a gallon to $5 a gallon across the country.         

As practically everyone outside his immediate entourage saw and predicted, these were disastrous errors. The excuse regularly given in the case of the wall was that Biden had inherited a “broken” immigration policy. In support of this outrageous falsehood, all that could be offered was the tear-jerking fabrication about children being separated from their parents and confined to cages that reminded that eminent authority on modern European history, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, of “Auschwitz.” 

In fact, Obama had installed those facilities while Biden was vice president, and they were not in any conventional parlance actually cages. The migrant children who stayed there undoubtedly received the most nourishing meals and useful exercise and education in the best and most sanitary comfort that they had ever known. Many of them were not related to the adults from whom they were separated, but as everyone who follows the issue knows, were merely props to facilitate the claim that the migrants were authentic fugitives from injustice, and to capitalize on the bias of civilized American authorities not to separate people from their ostensible minor children. In most cases this was a fiction and mere tactics to tug at America’s heartstrings. 

Unfortunately, the least successful attorney general of recent times, (apart from the increasingly inept Merrick Garland—Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch were merely odious, not, unfortunately, entirely unsuccessful), Jeff Sessions, did not see the public relations minefield that he was plunging into head-first when he approved these separations. But it was in fact not at all the heart-rending act of cruelty that Trump’s critics represented. The speaker’s comparison with Auschwitz is on a par with the widespread effort of prominent Democrats to represent Trump as a person of Nazi attitudes and sympathies: it was as vile and unfounded a campaign of defamation as American politics has ever known.   

Trump’s “broken” immigration policy was the most successful the country has had at least since Eisenhower’s time in the 1950s, and the border was on the verge of a full and functioning restoration that would have enabled the country to admit those whom it wished to admit and decline those whom it wished to exclude, when Biden was inaugurated. There can be only one conceivable explanation for the current policy of admitting such a flood of unprocessed arrivals, which doubtless includes many worthy and good people who will unquestionably be assets to the country and its future. But it is also demonstrably true and in any case inevitable, that this mass of undocumented migrants contains an inordinate number of riffraff, dangerous criminals, and people incapable of contributing usefully to American life and certain to be a dead weight on the social, law enforcemtn, and educational services of the country where they have illicitly arrived.      

The only possible motive for this otherwise inexplicable step toward national suicide is the notorious view of the Democrats that almost all of these people will be so grateful for having been admitted to the United States, they will become permanent Democratic voters. This made the initial landmine under the whole concept of American citizenship, the sanctuary city, even more explosive: municipal authorities ordered the police not to carry out the immigration laws of the country. That this has been permitted to go on for decades almost uncontradicted andl, if it is not reversed, it will be seen by historians as a first step in the self-induced collapse of the American state.

These measures are complemented by the further ambitions of the Democrats—incited by their horror at the rejection of the political establishment in the election of Donald Trump as president—contained in H.R.1 and complementary proposals in the Senate demanding all verification of voters’ identity be scrapped and that unlimited ballot harvesting be encouraged. There were accompanying ambitions to add the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico as states of the Union and reliable sources of permanent election of Democratic senators. Additional assurances of a permanent Democratic majority were to be provided by the reduction of the Senate to a straight majority vote for any measure, and by the expansion of the Supreme Court to assure that any constitutional inconveniences would be quickly dispensed. The Democrats have been astonishingly successful in their effort to ensure that the constitutional requirement that voters be citizens is overlooked. This remains a battle still to be decided. 

Most of this egregious program has already been abandoned and, even if undocumented immigrants continue to pour in at their present rate, indications are that it annoys members of the Latin American community who reached the country legally as well as the complacent majority of Americans that is finally recognizing the danger of these insane policies in numbers that will more than counter the influx of new doubly illegal (as undocumented, non-citizens) voters. The aggrieved are likely to support the next administration, exasperated at what prior to President Trump was for decades a euphemism for cowardly inactivity: “comprehensive immigration reform.”

This must have been the motive for the otherwise insane Biden immigration policies and it is not clear whether Biden himself, who masqueraded for decades as a pillar of bipartisan constitutionality, signed on to this for this motive or if he actually believes the campaign bunk about protecting the families of wretched persecuted fugitive families. Whatever his motive, it is a disaster and is seen by practically everyone to be a disaster, and the rejection of the Democrats in the midterm elections and in the next presidential election will become steadily more likely (and overwhelmingly so) the longer Biden allows his Inauguration Day blunder stopping the southern border wall to continue. The contemptible spectacle of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas nodding like an articulate figurine as he says “The border is closed” merely aggravates an intolerable state of affairs. 

The administration’s pursuit of higher energy costs, presumably to facilitate the enactment of a radical green program, is a parallel disaster, both in its proportions and in the ease with which it could have been avoided, and could even now be corrected. There is no evidence that the world is really becoming warmer in a way that poses any danger to life or is outside existing, long-established climate cycles. Nor is there any conclusive evidence that the world’s temperature is influenced by human conduct. 

The desire to inflict terrible costs on our societies to reduce carbon emissions is a fusion of the misguided fervor of legitimate but overwrought conservationists and the cynical reappearance of the international Left, defeated in the Cold War but now attacking capitalism from the more promising and apparently idealistic perspective of the salvation of the planet. The release last week of 50 million barrels of oil from the strategic reserve, three days consumption, is universally seen as the paltriest tokenism.   

Carbon dioxide is essential to life but for the purposes of the militant green movement it has been portrayed as a virtual poison. This is all nonsense and fortunately it will not require an arcane and incomprehensible scientific argument to establish that fact. We will be saved from ourselves by a consumer revolt at skyrocketing energy costs. 

Biden and his followers and minders will go down more than anything else on these two issues. If the president just kept his head at least on his first day in office and dodged these two bullets, he might not be facing the dismal personal and national future that he did this Thanksgiving weekend. 

Biden Remarks on 'Omnicron,' Masks, and Lockdowns Show He's Still a Confused Mess

Nick Arama reporting for RedState

Joe Biden gave a very brief formal speech to the nation today about the emergence of the new Omicron variant of the Wuhan coronavirus.

In large measure, his remarks boiled down to repeatedly saying “get vaccinated and get booster shots,” he didn’t have anything much deeper to offer than that.

Biden started off not getting the name of the new variant right, calling it “Omnicron” rather than “Omicron.”

He did it repeatedly.

He doesn’t even realize he said it wrong, because he’s so concentrated on just trying to read the teleprompter, it’s beyond him to realize it.

Biden also pleaded with people to wear their masks when they’re indoors in public settings and around other people.

Really? Like he did in Nantucket a couple of days ago, even after he knew of the emergence of the new variant? This is the same guy who just on Saturday, was busted out in Nantucket in a store without a mask on, surrounded by a lot of people. That was just one of the many times he’s been caught not wearing a mask, despite his constant promotion of them as the answer to the virus.

You have to wear a mask and take it seriously but he doesn’t. So obviously he’s very concerned about “Omnicron.” Not. How does he think he has any credibility at all when he says one thing but then does another?

Biden then took a few questions, consulting a pre-approved list.

Biden was asked what should be done about the places where there isn’t a mask mandate? In responding, he appears to be reading from notes propped up in front of him in order just to say he urged everyone to wear a mask unless they are eating or speaking. Why would you need to consult notes to respond to that?

Not one of the reporters asked him: If he is pushing masks so much as the proper response, why did he have his mask down in the store in Nantucket? That might have been too much journalism and probably would have sparked an angry response from Biden.

They did, however, ask whether he was going to institute any new lockdowns, something that the god of science, Dr. Anthony Fauci, refused to rule out in remarks yesterday.

“Are lockdowns off the table,” a reporter asked. Biden’s response was not encouraging. Yes, he said, “for now.”

In other words, prepare, they’re likely coming back.

If lockdowns aren’t off the table at this point, it means they’ve learned nothing and they’re not ruling out having them again, even with no indication that the Omicron variant poses any real greater danger than already exists, even with the doctor who identified it saying the cases are extremely mild. Lockdowns didn’t work before, but hey, I’m sure they’ll work this next time if we really really believe! While they didn’t work, the harm they caused and indeed are still causing is immense — everything from people losing their jobs to people not getting proper treatment for other medical illnesses.

Then, as he left, he completely forgot about the mask again, once again violating what he just said.

He can’t even stick to the narrative through his remarks.

I hate to say it but it looks like they’re gearing up once again. But this time, people aren’t going to stand for it.

Joe Biden Declares Everything is Okay After Meeting With Retail Executives

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse

Yesterday, Joe Biden met with a roundtable group of retail executives and CEO’s.  The topics of the discussion were supply chain issues and current impacts to businesses that are causing rapid inflation.

At the conclusion of the meeting there was supposed to be a press conference where Biden was going to outline what his administration is doing to combat the ever-increasing problem of inflation.   However, moments before the public remarks were scheduled to begin, the White House cancelled them.  Instead, the people managing Joe Biden sent out the following tweet:

According to the White House messaging, everything is wonderful – there is no cause for concern, the supply chain crisis has been handled, shortages are no longer present, shelves are full, the clouds have parted and Santa is enjoying his time preparing for Christmas by watching unicorns play with the reindeer.  Baghdad Bob would be proud.

If the narrative is true, if there is so much good news to share, then why cancel the remarks and press conference about inflation?

One likely scenario is the retail CEO’s told the White House about: (1) upcoming additional price increases due to energy policy; and (2) the latest news from China where the shipment of goods is going to go from bad (slow) to much worse (a virtual halt):

(CNBC) – […] Helen Zhu, managing director at Hong Kong-based investment firm Nan Fung Trinity echoed similar sentiments about China’s response.

“If omicron turns out to be a major threat, I think China will certainly continue to lengthen the period of staying isolated,” she said on CNBC’s “Street Signs Asia” on Monday. […]  China’s ultra-strict zero-Covid strategy involves mass lockdowns — even if just one or a handful of cases are detected. It also includes extensive testing, heavily controlled or closed borders, as well as robust contact tracing systems and quarantine mandates.

The Asian giant has also implemented strict checks at its ports, including monitoring ships and cargo, to prevent cases from slipping into the country. (read more)

Beijing is cunning.  They know Biden is weak politically and personally.  Everything they can do to increase the impact of inflation weakens the U.S. economy, and China can do an awful lot on the supply side to create even more U.S. inflation.

Biden’s globalist policies in general make the U.S. Main Street economy very vulnerable; however, Biden’s energy policies specifically make that vulnerability exponentially worse.

10 Major Disasters From History And How The Media Reported Them

Babylon Bee🐝

Whenever we think of mainstream media journalists, one word comes to mind: incorruptible. As long as there have been human atrocities throughout history, there have been fair and honest mainstream media organizations courageously reporting on them! Thanks, mainstream media!

Here is a list of disasters from history, and the headlines that were found in the media the next day:

French Revolution: "Hundreds Of Guillotine Accidents Reported"

Tiananmen Square: "Man Killed In Collision With Tank"

OJ Simpson: "Pair Of Gloves Strangles OJ's Wife"

Aztec human sacrifice: "Native Peoples Discover Innovative Way To Reduce Carbon Footprint"

Pompeii: "Trump Destroys Pompeii"

Oklahoma City Bombing: "Fertilizer Mishap At Government Building"

Las Vegas mass shooting: "Bump Stock Accidentally Explodes"

9/11: "Shortsighted Contractors Build Towers In Path Of Oncoming Planes"

Hitler invades Poland: "Poland Invades Hitler!"

Herod killing babies: "Strong Attendance At Pro-Choice Rally In Bethlehem" 

What would we do without the media? Thanks, media! 

Here’s Why OSHA Has No Legal Power To Enforce A Vaccine Mandate

Congress did not grant OSHA the power to 

enforce vaccines in American workplaces.

by Paul J. Larkin Jr. for The Federalist

Where do matters stand now with President Joe Biden’s vaccination mandate? Its fate is uncertain.

On November 12, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit stayed the effect of the OSHA mandate pending a final ruling on its validity. But all of the appeals have been consolidated in a different appellate court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. OSHA later announced that it has “suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement of the ETS pending future developments in the litigation.”

That announcement is less helpful to employers than it might seem. OSHA could ask the Sixth Circuit to vacate the stay. Plus, if the mandate is upheld, OSHA could immediately begin enforcement proceedings against anyone not then in compliance. What OSHA will do is presently unknown.

Yet one thing is perfectly clear: OSHA lacks the legal authority to force a COVID-19 vaccine on Americans who do not want it. Small wonder that more than half the states are suing to stop the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate.

Start by understanding the playing field in which this issue arises.

First, federal agencies have only the authority that Congress has granted them by statute. Agencies cannot vest themselves with additional power by issuing rules.

Second, agencies cannot undertake unauthorized action even in an emergency. As the Supreme Court explained last summer, “our system does not permit agencies to act unlawfully even in pursuit of desirable ends,” which includes “combatting the spread of the COVID-19 Delta variant.”

Third, vaccinations are materially different from personal protective equipment (PPE), like goggles, gloves, or masks. PPE offers a protective external shield to fend off harmful substances, preventing them from piercing the human skin, a shell that can be shed at the end of the workday. By contrast, vaccinations are not something we wear, they are something that is injected into our bodies to spur the immune system to generate antibody responses to pathogens. T-cells cannot be tossed into the trash at 5 p.m.

Fourth, Congress limits each agency’s authority in order to focus its responsibilities. There is no Department of Making Life Better Without Leaving Anyone Behind. Just as only physicians can diagnose disease, prescribe medication, or perform surgery, health-care agencies can only make medical decisions that Congress wants made and which are constitutionally authorized.

Fifth, Congress has trusted the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to regulate vaccines, yet neither agency may order the public to be vaccinated. If so, why would Congress have granted OSHA that power? If your answer is, “I can’t imagine why,” you’re on the right track.

Now, turn to the text of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (or OSH Act). It directs the labor secretary to protect employees against “toxic materials or harmful physical agents.” The act does not define those terms, so traditional principles of statutory interpretation require a reader to consult the dictionary for their meaning.

“Toxic” generally refers to “poisons,” like arsenic, while “harmful physical agents” generally does not include bacteria, which are living pathogens, or viruses, which might or might not be “living” organisms, but certainly can reproduce, unlike arsenic. In addition, pathogens like SARS-CoV-2 are “communicable” — they spread from person to person — while toxins like arsenic do not.

Moreover, a hazardous waste is a “dangerous physical agent” because it is (for example) flammable or explosive, not because it replicates inside a human. Viruses do, but they neither burn nor explode.

Moreover, the term “toxic” appears elsewhere in the OSH Act. The government must prepare a report “listing all toxic substances in industrial usage.” Viruses like SARS-CoV-2, however, are hardly “in industrial usage.” Accordingly, the most natural reading of the OSH Act does not include SARS-CoV-2 as “toxic” or a harmful physical “agent.”

Now consider how the OSH Act fits into the framework of the federal laws directly addressing viruses. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) directs the FDA to decide whether a vaccine is safe and effective for its intended use, while the Public Health Service Act empowers the CDC director to quarantine infected parties to prevent an epidemic from erupting or cabin its spread.

Neither law empowers the government to require anyone to be vaccinated or entrusts either agency with such decision-making power. That fact is important. If Congress wanted a federal agency to have that power, Congress would surely have granted it to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or Centers for Disease Control, not OSHA, which Congress designed to address workplace hazards, not epidemics, and empowered to require employees to wear safety equipment, not receive vaccines.

Congress has always treated that issue as a responsibility for medical personnel. The Biologics Control Act of 1902 designated the surgeons general of the Army, Navy, and Marine Service as a board to issue rules governing the issuance and revocation of licenses by the Treasury secretary. Congress transferred that decision-making authority from one group of medical personnel to another in the FDCA. Congress did not grant OSHA the same responsibility in the OSH Act.