SB 277 Lawsuit – What’s Up Doc? What Happens Now?

Canary Party/Health Choice Thumped. The Big Kids are on the Playground…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

The Canary Party/Health Choice (CP/HC) crap group got out-maneuvered. They have lost control of the anti-SB 277 lawsuit. The Big Kids have taken it over. About time…

Yes, it was a takeover and it was absolutely necessary. Thousands of people had donated money, I’d guess, without having any idea they were being manipulated into funding a watered-down version of a REAL lawsuit.

They ended up with a watered-down lawsuit that, in actuality, corresponds to the CP/HC policy of NEVER, EVER, criticizing vaccines.

In the first anti-SB277 campaign, trying to stop SB 277 passing in the California legislature, the group calling itself California Coalition for Health Choice (CCHC) tightly controlled every aspect of the legislative campaign banning anyone and everyone that deviated from the mantra “We know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper).”

CCHC, I believe was, itself, tightly controlled by the Canary Party/Health Choice crap group. Money poured in from CP/HC sources keeping the useless message in the forefront. Of course SB 277 passed. And the campaigners were exhausted having done one useless thing after another.

In the second campaign, the so-called Referendum, the Sacramento based group actually conducted a campaign to get a SB 277 Referendum on the November 2016 Presidential Election ballot.  This was a STUPIDER idea then the “We know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper)” concept.

Had they gotten the 387,000 signatures and gotten the Referendum on the 2016 ballot, Big Pharma would have easily spent 500 million dollars in advertising against the Referendum making “Mandatory Vaccines” etched in granite in California. Merck would have chortled at that, braying out nationwide “See, Mandatory Vaccines are the will of the people!”

It is common knowledge that if you want to win a Referendum you put it on an off-year ballot when the only people that go to the voting booths are those that support the Referendum.

And, the campaigners were exhausted once again – for nothing.

In the third campaign, the so-called Pan Recall, the CP/HC people didn’t even try to hide behind another fake organization name. They just set up a “Pan Recall” apparatus and did virtually NOTHING to make the recall happen.

As you can imagine once I heard there were efforts, statewide, to get an anti-SB 277 lawsuit together I put my observers in place to watch to see if there was a CP/HC presence, and if so, asked the question “how much control did they have, and what were they doing?”

I knew that both Aaron Siri and Bob Moxley were involved in strategy making and I could not imagine either of these two alpha males going along with a strategy where the players coordinated their lipstick color with their toenail polish – the usual MAIN tactic of the CP/HC teams.

With time running out to file a lawsuit, and with SOME money rolling in, the SB 277 lawsuit organizational team was running out of options and were getting a LOT OF PRESSURE from donors to do something. Already, you may have noticed, neither Moxley nor Siri were stepping up to be Lead Attorney.

You should ask, at this point “Why not?” Both of these two alpha male litigators were eminently qualified to handle a leadership role and they had already WRITTEN THE CASE. In fact call, or email, Mary Holland, Kim Mack Rosenberg, and/or Janet Nalbandyan and ask THEM why not. (I am smiling…)

So, why, at the last minute did they turn to Jim Turner? (I am smiling, again). When you see how the case that was filed was watered down from what Moxley and Siri had made, maybe a picture is forming in your mind?

Do you think maybe that neither Moxley nor Siri wanted any part of a watered-down version?

So, the organizers go to Jim Turner who calls some of his friends, including me, to find out what is REALLY going on. Turner, of course, quietly called Moxley and Siri and got the REAL story of what was happening behind the scenes.

Tim Bolen and Jim Turner at the Health Freedom Congress

So, why, do you think, did they go to Jim Turner? Did they see him as this NICE OLD Guy who could be manipulated?

Jim LOOKS like a nice old guy, and he is pleasant to everyone. But, if the Canaries thought Jim would be a dupe, and take the blame for a failed lawsuit, they had NOT done their homework.

Jim picked up his cell phone and began the case takeover.

How? Simple. He called his friends in the North American Health Freedom Movement and pretty much said “We have an opportunity…”

After Jim brought in the three BIG non-profit Plaintiffs, the ones with REAL and SUBSTANTIAL memberships, who actually run REAL campaigns, including suing government agencies, I think the Canaries began to get attacks of diarrhea.

Then I, Tim Bolen appeared, writing case details with flavor, completely promoting and supporting the lawsuit.

Then Moxley joined Jim Turner on the legal team.

It’s no wonder that the message on the Health Choice conference call was an angry “Jim Turner f**ked us…”

No shit, Sherlock…


Now, the Big Kids have the case. No bird-brained, half-baked “We know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper)” concepts.

As you saw in the Turner/Moxley videos Robert Scott Bell did there is a whole new ballgame.

A whole new ballgame…

So, kiddies, that money you raised WAS NOT WASTED…

More, in the future, if you are asked to do something, it will be for something USEFUL. And FUN. And friendly.

Go look at my earlier article and read who those Non-profits Jim brought in really are and what they are currently involved in, and what they have done.

And these people, although great, are just SOME members of the North American Health Freedom Movement. You are going to meet a lot more over the next few years. (smile here).

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen  


10 thoughts on “SB 277 Lawsuit – What’s Up Doc? What Happens Now?”

  1. Since vaccines are an uninsurable risk which courts have held to be “unavoidably unsafe” anyone who tries to oppose vax mandates without addressing the harm vaccines must cause will never prevail against “public policy.”

    With strong voices for justice like Jim Turner leading the way, I remain quite optimistic that SB277 will fall!

  2. Hi Ralph, I am not an attorney like you, so it pleases me to hear that a legal professional is optimistic regarding this case. At the time the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state in the Jacobsen case, it is my understanding that Judge Harlan warned that if the state targeted a particular population, the court would be forced to step in to protect them. SB 277 targets and discriminates against children specifically. It is also my understanding that the state could mandate these laws, but one could exempt themselves by paying a $5 fine and was permitted to continue their normal lifestyle. This would be a more reasonable and justified penalty than to permanently ban a child from public and private schools, which not only denies them an equal education, but it isolates them from their peers and social groups, promotes predjugice and effectively demotes them to second-class citizens. It is my belief that these differences set SB 277 apart from other court cases as well as the fact that vaccines have changed significantly. They are now being manufactured in China, and the the makers of these vaccines are not required to disclose the ingredients and cell lines being used in the manufacturing process, effectively eliminating informed consent. I appreciated Turner’s explanation as to why non-medical exemptions are necessary for informed consent as well. I wholeheartedly agree with the attorneys’ intentions to emphasize vaccine injuries in the case; for, this highlights the differences in the vaccines since prior cases and helps the judges understand the gravity of their ruling. Lastly, to not include vaccines in this case and other cases fighting SB 277 is an injustice to the cause. Again, I’m not an attorney, but these are my thoughts.

  3. FYI (regarding above comment) There were injuries and deaths from smallpox vaccine, and groups protesting. You can find photos, fliers and ads online from these early anti immunization groups. I agree the schedule and safety is much worse today, but these things have never been good or effective.

    The Spanish flu was also a lie, man made. Does anyone believe they really exhumed a mummy from afar recently, to “study the Spanish flu”. Random news story recently mentioned that. More like opening it at the lab to fear monger some more.

    And we’ve all heard the story of small pox purposefully spread among native populations.

    I also don’t understand how a single vaccine for temporary period of time during an actual outbreak, is the same as an open ended mandate that includes non contagious and non life threatening diseases. And they’re all so dangerous, with a long list of harmful, known to be detrimental ingredients.

    We’re done with these vaccines as a species. We can all read about these dark ages of barbaric medicine in the history books.

  4. Hardball we wanna see! Wanna see Pan & Dean squirming in the witness box. There is such an enormous body of evidence, good science from reputable scientists, showing that vaccines are dangerous and ineffective, how could we lose? Connecting vaccines with the epidemic of autoimmune conditions. It certainly isn’t ethical, and how could it be constitutionally-permitted to mandate a medical procedure, without exception, without any compelling reason, such as an actual epidemic, which is so risky and ineffective? Even Poland concedes that measles is transmissible among fully-vaccinated student populations. I know the state has the power of subpoena, but do plaintiff’s attorneys in a civil case have the power to compel witnesses to appear and testify? Thinking of William S. Thompson here, among others (the whole gang of five, in fact). Julie Gerberding. All the skeletons in the closet. The slime who are destroying our nation, one child at a time.

  5. Laura,

    Good point about Jacobson. The case was not about vax safety (an issue never raised) but only about state power.

    The court anticipated the issue, however, and Jacobson can be read as a case that says the Federal courts have power to intervene in vaccine mandates, using the reverse language, “the courts are not without power” to intervene IF health or life were shown to be at risk.

  6. Thanks for clearing that up Ralph. That’s an interesting point that the vaccine injuries and risks were not argued in Jacobsen case. I’m glad they are doing it now!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.