In an earlier article, I wrote, The Prep Act: Protecting Pogroms Perpetrated by Prescription. This Act had been signed by President George H. W. Bush provided immunity to Big Pharma for the harm caused by a medical response in an emergency. This Act was enacted in December of 2005 as a result of envelopes supposedly filled with anthrax received by Congress in 2001. Frightened politicians, not wishing to have to deal with delays in any needful treatment knew that the Medical “community” would balk at making any quick decisions (and treatments) in fear of financial damage. So, the Prep Act removed that concern by removing their liability – assuring that, if necessary, Congress would receive immediate treatment by that “community” if required. Of course, this made the Act available when the “pandemic” of 2016 “happened” followed closely by the mandating of “vaccinations” to “cure” or “prevent” the “unknown disease” COVID – yada-yada-yada &etc. Seldom have legal efforts been made to prevent justice being served on criminals, but the Prep Act has certainly been a great help to those inventing and disbursing these “vaccines” who would, under ordinary circumstances, be in danger of having to answer to those who have suffered (and died) as a result of their nostrums. How to fix that? Why remove the liability, of course! And so, with the sudden (and so carefully planned) COVID “pandemic” in 2020, the Prep Act provided a perfect cover for any response put forth by the “medical industry” as these people and corporations no longer had to be concerned with the fall-out arising from their nostrums. And as that fall-out is still playing out, apparently the Prep Act will, as intended, prevent Big Pharma from being held at least financially accountable for its part in the whole thing – perhaps even including the bio-agent responsible for the “pandemic” in the first place! It is an ideal set up! So ideal, that there are those who wonder if the 2001 “anthrax attack” was not another Deep State false flag designed to do just what it did do, give carte blanche to Big Pharma and those who profited from the “pandemic” to act without concern for financial consequences. But now, at least, it may be that this immense injustice is being thwarted. According to Dr. Joseph Sansone’s blog, three States’ Supreme Courts – North Carolina, Vermont and Maine – have heard cases and ruled on the Prep Act. According to Dr. Sansone, it was a matter of parental consent. Parents had sued over their children being forcibly vaccinated but had lost in the lower courts, bringing the matter to those States’ Supreme Courts. In response to this situation, Dr. Sansone asked the question, “Why would you inject someone with a vaccine against their will?” To which he gave the answer(s): · Because you are so sure the vaccine contains a wonderful, health-giving potion; · Because it does not cross your mind you are committing a crime. Even if there was nothing in the syringe that you were injecting, STILL sticking a needle in someone is battery. Injecting them with a gene therapy could change their life’s trajectory and is even more of an attack on someone’s bodily autonomy; · Because you think you are shielded from all liability by the PREP Act, but only after injecting the vaccine; · Because you are being paid per injected dose; · Because they are a child and therefore, you can! · Because you are “just following orders.” The Doctor then goes on to point out: I do not know what was in the minds of the individual “health care” workers in Vermont, Maine and North Carolina who chose to inject children with COVID vaccines against their will, without a parental consent form, and without making much effort to learn what the parents’ wishes were. It makes you wonder what else happens in schools, away from the prying eyes of parents. How often did this happen? We don’t know, but parents in Vermont, Maine and North Carolina were understandably upset enough to sue the health care workers and the schools over their children’s unwarranted jabs. Instead of obtaining an easy win, in each case the parents and children lost in the lower courts. How could this be? Battery is battery. Consent is consent. You see, the PREP Act provides an extraordinary, total liability shield over everyone involved in the administration of a “covered countermeasure.” Or at least people thought it did, until North Carolina’s Supreme Court ruling on Thursday. The anthrax letters gave members of Congress PTSD. Even they could be attacked! And so they passed the PREP Act, allowing designated countermeasures to be used in an emergency, only after a cabinet Secretary had declared the emergency, then the HHS Secretary declared there was a drug or vaccine which had better than even odds of ameliorating the emergency, and then after the FDA Commissioner issued an EUA for the product. Congress may have thought that was good enough — a 3-step process before the liability shield was issued. But we now know that it is not much of a deterrent. We also know that all you need is the potential for an emergency, not an actual emergency. And so, the PREP Act was born in 2005. And kids have been jabbed with a dangerous so-called vaccine. Finally, a state Supreme Court said that no, the PREP Act does NOT protect vaccinators from being charged with other crimes, like battery. The PREP Act does not waive other Constitutional protections. Many of us think the PREP Act is unconstitutional for that reason, but the courts have not agreed, until now. What I still find troubling, however, is that the judges vote along party lines. We thought judges were “blind”—that they put aside all bias. Yet in case after case, the judge’s party seems to be the deciding factor as to how they will decide a case. In any event, this blow to the PREP Act is welcome and long overdue. Apparently, the North Carolina Supreme Court (at least) “opened a path for parents to sue schools and health clinics over the Covid vaccines. The ruling was 5-2 along party lines, with Republicans voting in favor of the parents and Democrats dissenting. Chief Justice Paul Newby acknowledged the PREP Act's broad immunity rules. But he added that the unwilling vaccination violated the constitutional rights of Smith and his parents — and therefore should void the immunity rules and open the way for lawsuits that claim violations of constitutional rights. Fellow Republican justices Richard Dietz and Trey Allen joined in Newby's opinion. Republican justices Tamara Barringer and Phil Berger Jr. wrote a concurring opinion that said they agreed with everything Newby wrote, but that they had wanted to go even further in rolling back health workers' immunity protections as provided by the Act. Democrats, on the other hand, accused the Republicans of practicing the “judicial activism” they usually claim to oppose, stating that the majority of “turn(ed) somersaults to reach particular interpretations of the written law.” Interestingly enough, nobody seemed to look at – much less address – the incredible amount of “immunity” being granted by the Act to Big Pharma and those mandating (and carrying out) the application of what in this case are essentially bioweapons on an unsuspecting and trusting populace. Of course, this is the real crime of the Prep Act and thus demands penalties far greater than mere economic recompense for the damage that has been done to those forced to take these poisons – damage that may well be permanent and even fatal. None of what happened in the “Covid Pandemic” was an accident or misjudgment or even carelessness! It was (and remains) an attack on mankind itself and should be treated as the greatest treason to date against the human race!
In the upcoming Manitowoc School Board election, voters face
a critical decision that will shape the future of our children's education.
Among the candidates vying for positions on the board are Ann Holsen, David
Bowman, and Mary Lofy Blahnik, three individuals who, despite their claims of
nonpartisanship, have demonstrated a clear alignment with liberal ideologies
that threaten to undermine the quality and integrity of our schools. As
concerned citizens, it is our duty to examine the records, statements, and
associations of these candidates to determine their fitness for the vital roles
they seek. In this blog post, we will delve into the troubling evidence that
exposes Holsen, Bowman, and Blahnik's liberal agendas, raising serious doubts
about their ability to provide the impartial, student-focused leadership our
school board so desperately needs. Join us as we shed light on the true colors
of these candidates, exposing the risks they pose to our children's education
and the future of our community.Mary Lofy Blahnik “In the fall of 2022, I left my Green Bay HR position
briefly, as I was hired as the Director of HR for Manitowoc Public Schools. At
that time, I was very concerned about the leadership of the central office and
School Board, so after just two months, I returned to Green Bay, as I was not
interested in being part of a leadership team that was making decisions that
did not put student learning first.” Mary Lofy Blahnik's history of job-hopping between seven
different school districts is a cause for concern. Blahnik spent a mere two
months working in the very district she is now running to represent on the
school board, only to leave because she disagreed with the direction the
district was heading. This brief and unsatisfactory stint calls into question
her ability to work collaboratively with other board members and administrators
to enact positive change. This troubling pattern of behavior suggests that
Blahnik may not be committed to the MPSD and could potentially abandon her post
on the school board when faced with challenges or disagreements. The MPSD
deserves someone who will move the district forward, not a quitter who will
leave you, the voters. Mary Lofy Blahnik's attempt to leverage her volunteerism
with a certified therapy dog as relevant experience for serving on the
Manitowoc School Board is a prime example of her misplaced priorities and lack
of understanding of the role of a school board member. Her work with therapy
dogs is by no means a qualification for making critical decisions about our
children's education, curriculum, and school policies. Blahnik's emphasis on
her volunteer work with therapy dogs suggests a superficial approach to the
complex issues facing our schools and a failure to grasp the gravity of the
responsibilities she seeks to undertake. Mary Lofy Blahnik's self-proclaimed expertise in
"equity and inclusion initiatives and practices" is a concerning
indication of her commitment to pushing a liberal agenda within our schools.
While the principles of equity and inclusion may sound appealing on the
surface, they often serve as thinly veiled attempts to promote a particular
ideological viewpoint at the expense of academic excellence and fairness.Ann Holsen While Ann Holsen frequently touts her experience in the
nuclear sector as her primary qualification for the school board, she has yet
to explain how this background is relevant to the challenges facing our schools
today. The skills and knowledge required to succeed in the nuclear industry are
vastly different from those needed to effectively manage educational
institutions and shape policies that will benefit our students. Holsen's
inability to connect her work experience to the realm of education raises serious
doubts about her suitability for the school board. It is clear that Holsen's attempt to portray herself as a
nonpartisan centrist is a facade. Her reluctance to address key issues
directly, her use of Democratic buzzwords, and the color of her campaign signs
being Kamala Harris blue, demonstrate that she is, in fact, a liberal candidate
attempting to deceive voters. Our school board needs members who are
transparent, knowledgeable, and genuinely committed to the best interests of
our children, not those who hide behind empty rhetoric and vague statements. She refuses to directly answer questions about keeping pride
materials and pornographic books in schools and if DEI should be implemented.
Instead, she resorts to using buzzwords like "inclusive environments for
all learners," a common tactic employed by Democratic candidates to mask
their true intentions. When questioned about her stance on the Success for All
curriculum change, Holsen admitted, "I am currently not a K-12 curriculum
expert." This raises serious concerns about her ability to make informed
decisions on crucial educational matters.David Bowman David Bowman retired from MPSD in 2024 and had a salary of
$77,841, not including benefits. This salary was 15% higher than the average
and 14% higher than the median salary in the MPSD and 18% higher than the state
average. David Bowman's time as a choir teacher does not
automatically qualify him for a position on the school board. Managing a
classroom and conducting a choir are vastly different from the complex
responsibilities and decision-making required of a school board member.
Bowman's background does not demonstrate the necessary skills and expertise
needed to navigate the multifaceted challenges of educational policy and
administration. Our schools need leaders with a diverse set of experiences and
a deep understanding of the issues at hand, not just those who can
"conduct their way through a meeting." David Bowman's associations and views raise serious concerns
about his ability to serve on the school board impartially. Bowman's Facebook
friendships with special interest group ALLY (created by Dayna Goetz) leaders
Bernie Starzewski, Jennifer Gleichner, and Lisa Johnston (current Vice Chair of
the Manitowoc County Democratic Party), as well as school board members Keith
Shaw and Kerry Trask (former chair of the Manitowoc County Democratic Party),
suggest a strong alignment with liberal ideologies. When questioned about his stance on Diversity, Equity, and
Inclusion (DEI), Bowman referred to an article promoting DEI, indicating his
support for this controversial approach. Furthermore, he has expressed his
approval of ALLY stickers and pride flags in schools, which many parents
believe are inappropriate for educational settings. Bowman's opposition to school choice is another alarming
aspect of his candidacy. By denying families the right to choose the best
educational options for their children, Bowman reveals his preference for a
one-size-fits-all approach that disregards the unique needs and values of
individual students. To further emphasize David Bowman's alignment with liberal
ideologies, it is worth noting that his yard signs bear the same design as
those of known liberal school board member Keith Shaw. This striking similarity
in campaign materials suggests a coordinated effort and shared agenda between
the two, raising questions about Bowman's claim to be an independent voice for
our children's education. In light of these facts, it is evident that David Bowman's
candidacy is driven by a liberal agenda that prioritizes special interests over
the well-being and education of our children. Our school board needs members
who are objective, open-minded, and committed to providing a quality education
for all students, not those who push a particular ideology at the expense of
our children's futures.Bowman In His Own Words "To my fellow
Christians who are cheering for Christian Nationalism... I wonder how many of
our founding Fathers would be heretics in your eyes..." "Are you
really in a position to question Harris's "record on crime" if you
nominate a convicted felon?" "I have seen a video of him stumping
another legislator using bible references to explain why she is wring in
supporting Trumpsim and Christian Nationalism. It is powerful!" "One
of the reasons I decided I SHOULD retire. There was no way I would have been
able to keep my opinions to myself this coming election cycle."
"Also... it will be able to fight more easily from outside than from the
inside..." "I cannot support the current iteration of the GOP cozying
up to dictators around the world at the expense of our relationships with
democracy... You can listen to the leader of the GOP speak right now and hear
him state what he believes. It is misogynistic, homo-phobic, racist,
anti-worker..." He also made a comment criticizing the GOP for going after
birth control. "Democrats support the majority of what I believe in." David Bowman's statements reveal a troubling lack of
impartiality and a strong alignment with liberal ideologies. By openly
criticizing Christian Nationalism, questioning the GOP's stance on crime, and
expressing support for Democratic policies, Bowman demonstrates his inability
to separate his personal political beliefs from that of the role of the school
board. Bowman's declaration that he "cannot support the current iteration
of the GOP" due to its alleged coziness with dictators and supposed
misogyny, homophobia, racism, and anti-worker sentiments is a clear indication
of his partisan bias. His comment criticizing the GOP for "going after
birth control" and his admission that "Democrats support the majority
of what I believe in" further underscore his liberal leanings. Moreover,
Bowman's statement that he decided to retire because he "would not have
been able to keep [his] opinions to [himself] this coming election cycle"
raises concerns about his ability to serve on the school board with the
required objectivity and professionalism. "It is not within the role of the schools (or the
country) to pass judgment one way or another on how a student (or anyone)
identifies. It is our role to ensure each student is able to achieve their full
potential. From personal experience with transgender students, the discomfort
they tend to show in their bodies seems quite debilitating. In Wisconsin, we
have some guidelines from the WIAA. Students that are trans and let’s be honest
the concern is about trans-females, must be on a year of medically documented
testosterone blockers before they are allowed to participate in sports." -
David Bowman David Bowman's response to the issue of Title IX and
transgender students in sports reveals a concerning lack of understanding and a
willingness to prioritize political correctness over fairness and safety.
Bowman asserts that schools should not pass judgment on how a student
identifies, but this stance fails to acknowledge the very real biological
differences between males and females that can create an uneven playing field
in sports. By disregarding these differences, Bowman's approach risks undermining
the hard-fought gains of Title IX, which was designed to ensure equal
opportunities for female athletes. Furthermore, Bowman's focus on the
"discomfort" of transgender students ignores the potential discomfort
and unfairness experienced by female athletes who may be forced to compete
against biologically male opponents. While compassion for all students is
important, it should not come at the expense of fairness and safety in sports.
Bowman's reference to require trans-female, biological male, athletes to undergo
a year of testosterone blockers before participating in sports, is an
inadequate solution. This requirement does not fully address the physical
advantages that biological males may have, even after a period of hormone
therapy. In light of these concerns, it is clear that David Bowman's stance on
Title IX and transgender athletes is misguided and potentially detrimental to
the integrity of girls' sports in our schools. Our school board needs members
who can balance compassion with fairness and prioritize the well-being of all
students, not those who sacrifice fairness on the altar of political
correctness. The Three Ann Holsen, David Bowman, and Mary Lofy Blahnik are listed
as recommended candidates on the Manitowoc County Democratic Party's (which they spoke at a meeting of) and Wisconsin
Education Association Council’s websites. These affiliations raise serious
doubts about their ability to remain impartial and stand up to the teachers'
union (Manitowoc Education Association) and special interest group ALLY (which the three were invited to a meet and greet at the creator's house and attended).
Instead, it appears that these candidates would join forces with these groups,
prioritizing their interests over those of our students and community. The current school board is run by the teacher’s union. We
do not need more of the same. Electing candidates like Bowman and Mary Lofy
Blahnik would only perpetuate this biased viewpoint and create a conflict of
interest due to their previous district payroll’s. Bowman's and Blahnik’s attack on the Success for All (SFA)
program, which has been the only program to demonstrate success in years, is
troubling. Despite acknowledging that aspects of SFA have helped improve test
scores, they support the board's decision to terminate the program without
providing a clear, research-driven alternative. By dismissing the positive
impact of SFA, they demonstrate a lack of commitment to evidence-based
decision-making and a disregard for the needs of our students, along with a disregard
of the non-sustainability among staff of changing programs after a short time. These three candidates have demonstrated a lack of
commitment to the school board by failing to attend meetings before announcing
their candidacy. This raises doubts about their willingness to dedicate the
necessary time and effort to serve effectively. In light of this information, it is evident that Ann Holsen,
David Bowman, and Mary Lofy Blahnik are not suited for a nonpartisan school
board position. Our school board needs members who can put aside their personal
political beliefs and prioritize the well-being and education of all students,
not those who use their position to advance a particular ideological agenda of
their liberal allies. Share on Facebook
What happens when a sheriff upholds federal law and tells the truth
about the chaos caused by illegal immigration? In Washington state,
he gets sued. That’s
the unmistakable message Attorney General Nick Brown sent when he
launched a politically charged lawsuit against Adams County Sheriff
Dale Wagner for cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement. Sheriff Wagner’s “crime?” Cooperating with ICE and
sharing information with federal authorities in an effort to protect
his community. For doing his job, he got dragged into court by the
same state that ought to be backing him. Sheriff
Wagner didn’t back down. He traveled to Washington, D.C., and told
Congress exactly what was happening on the ground during a U.S. House
Judiciary hearing titled “Sanctuary
Jurisdictions: Magnet for Migrants, Cover for Criminals." Wagner
wasn’t alone. Ferry County Sheriff Ray Maycumber, along with seven
other sheriffs from Washington state, made the trip to stand beside
him. Their presence sent a clear message: Local law enforcement is
tired of being muzzled while illegal immigration wreaks havoc in
their communities. When even sheriffs are under attack for defending
the law, it’s clear that our leaders have chosen ideology over
public safety.
When
sheriffs are punished for doing their jobs, it’s not just
politics—it’s a direct assault on public safety. Sanctuary
Cities: A Cover for Criminals Washington
State isn’t just tying the hands of law enforcement—it’s
wrapping them in chains. Under the so-called “Keep
Washington Working Act,” sheriffs are
forbidden from cooperating with ICE. They can’t ask about
immigration status. They can’t detain illegal aliens—even violent
ones. They can’t even respond to ICE detainers. In effect, state
law protects illegal immigrants—even those with criminal
records—while punishing law enforcement officers who try to follow
federal law. That’s
not just reckless. That’s intentional sabotage of public safety.
These laws are designed to shield illegal immigrants, even those with
rap sheets as long as your arm, while gutting the power of sheriffs
who dare to do what’s right. Sheriff
Wagner sounded the alarm in his testimony, exposing how these laws
enable repeat offenders to walk free. AG Brown’s lawsuit makes it
clear: Washington state is more interested in protecting political
ideology than protecting people. In Washington, protecting your
people makes you a criminal and shielding illegal aliens makes you a
progressive hero. Jobs
Lost and the Economic Cost Illegal
immigration is bleeding out the American working class. It’s
not theory—it’s happening in every small
business, every orchard, every construction site where legal wages
are undercut by illegal labor. Working-class
Americans, including minorities and recent legal immigrants, are
watching jobs dry up and wages stagnate while global corporations
benefit and politicians virtue-signal. Ordinary citizens pay the
price in reduced opportunity, rising housing costs, and increased
competition for basic services. This
isn’t an accident. It’s a system designed to benefit the elite
while gutting the working man. And when someone dares to expose
it—like Sheriff Wagner—they’re not just ignored. They’re
targeted and are silenced by lawsuits and political threats. Drugs
and Death: Fentanyl at the Border This
isn’t just about jobs anymore—it’s also a public
health catastrophe. Fentanyl—manufactured by
China, trafficked by cartels—is now the number one killer of
Americans aged 18 to 45. And where’s it coming from? Across a
border that until recently was wide open and barely watched. Cartels
know exactly what they’re doing. They used migrant waves as cover
while slipping in deadly drugs that are poisoning our children. Under
the last administration, Border Patrol agents were pulled from
enforcement duties to babysit and process asylum claims—leaving
smugglers to flood this country with narcotics. Sheriffs
in places like Adams and Ferry Counties are watching their towns
collapse. Overdoses. Crime. Death. And instead of getting the backup
they need, they get lawsuits for daring to work with ICE. And
instead of empowering sheriffs to help stop the flow of drugs,
Washington State law strips them of authority and drags them into
court for cooperating with ICE. Human
Trafficking: Real Victims, Fake Compassion Every
politician in Olympia who hides behind “compassion” is complicit
in the trafficking of women and children. The same open-border
policies that let fentanyl pour in also enable
human slavery to flourish. Children
are “recycled”—used over and over again to help adults make
fraudulent asylum claims. Women are dragged into the sex trade. Some
never make it to America at all. Abuse,
slavery, and death. That’s the price of so-called sanctuary. That’s
the consequence of feel-good slogans that ignore the blood on the
border. That’s the opposite of compassion.
Sheriffs
like Wagner and Maycumber are trying to stop this. They are not the
villains—they’re the only ones fighting for the real victims. But
in this twisted reality, it’s the traffickers who walk free, while
the lawmen trying to stop them get sued by their state government. Courage
in the Face of Tyranny This
isn’t just policy failure—it’s state-level tyranny. Communities
are crumbling. Drugs are rampant. Jobs are vanishing. And the people
we trust to protect us are being stripped of their authority and
dragged into court. Sheriffs
Wagner and Maycumber represent the kind of local leadership we
need—men who are willing to speak the truth, follow the law, and
protect their people. But in Washington State, that kind of courage
comes at a cost: lawsuits, slander, and threats from the very people
who should be standing with them. What
we’re witnessing is moral cowardice dressed up as compassion.
Sanctuary policies don’t protect immigrants—they protect
criminals. And when the state uses its power to silence and punish
sheriffs who follow federal law, the line between governance and
tyranny disappears. We
must stop defending the indefensible. And we must start defending the
brave men and women who still believe in duty, law, and country. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nancy Churchill is a writer and educator in rural eastern Washington State, and the chair of the Ferry County Republican Party. She may be reached at DangerousRhetoric@pm.me. The opinions expressed in Dangerous Rhetoric are her own. Dangerous Rhetoric is available on thinkspot, Rumble and Substack. Support Dangerous Rhetoric
SOURCES: (1)
Adams County Sheriff Wagner Critiques Sanctuary Policies in
Congressional Hearing, Your Source One,
https://bit.ly/3EkRnNI (2)
Keep Washington Working Act Overview, Washington State
Legislature,
https://bit.ly/3RLo89N (3) The Fiscal and Economic Impact of
Immigration on the United States, Center for Immigration
Studies, https://bit.ly/3Re6H1F (4)
National Drug
Threat Assessment 2024,
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration,
https://bit.ly/4j8MIxB (5)
Human
Trafficking,
U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
https://bit.ly/3Enal6r