A well-researched presentation of the facts. Near the end, the term "legalized war crimes" stood out to me. The key question that was not addressed is: What are we to do? The piece offers no hope and no direction.

Expand full comment

We want to thank you so much for sharing our piece. You and Sasha were an inspiration for it and the value both of you have brought to the world has been an inspiration for our platform to find our voice again. Much love and solidarity, JP and Julie - book of ours -

Expand full comment

Federal laws (US Code) cannot override the Constitution. This includes all the shenanigans during and after the Civil War (i.e, any declarations of martial law, the elimination of the original 13th Amendment, and the DC Organic Act). The original Constitution is still in force and the current government (the US Corporation) is an illegal construct in its entirety, including all it laws. https://coloradopublicbanking.blogspot.com/2022/05/un-pandemic-treaty-invalid-us-is-not.html

Expand full comment

Presumably if these countermeasures are deployed overseas by US government (rather than by Pfizer under a commercial contract) and people are harmed then that could be construed as an act of war.


Expand full comment

As I listened to this video I kept saying to myself “how dare they sell my safety and my health without my input or permission.” “Who gives them the authority to do this?” They DO NOT have the authority and they are guilty of crimes against humanity.

Expand full comment

Nice intro video. I know the exact spot it was filmed from :)

Expand full comment

Dear Kathrine,

I'm about to watch the video and thanks so much for posting it, but want to say your Art choices are just absolutely grand and compelling ! ...don't know where you find the time to accompany all of your research with such inspiring, thought provoking images ...just more of your brilliance shining through.

Expand full comment


Take note - All quarantine codes reference "person(s)". Th first sentence implicates a man (or woman) based on a title. If you do not take a title with duties and obligations, then this DOES NOT APPLY.

Black's Law Dictionary -4th Edition:

PERSON: A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. People v. R. Co., 134 N.Y. 506, 31 N.E. 873.

"Persons" are of two kinds, natural and artificial. A natural person is a human being. Artificial persons include a collection or succession of natural persons forming a corporation; a collection of property to which the law attributes the capacity of having rights and duties. The latter class of artificial persons is recognized only to a limited extent in our law. Examples are the estate of a bankrupt or deceased person. Hogan v. Greenfield, 58 Wyo. 13, 122 P.2d 850, 853.

PERSON New York, 7 S.Ct. 108, 119 U.S. 110, 30 L.Ed. 342; and a statutory requirement of such conditions is not in conflict with the XIVth Amendment. (added for clarity - this is in reference to a 14th amendment citizen "person")

It has been held that when the word person is used in a legislative act, natural persons will be intended unless something appear in the context to show that it applies to artificial persons, Blair v. Worley, 1 Scam., Ill., 178; Appeal of Fox, 112 Pa. 337 ; 4 A. 149 ; but as a rule corporations will be considered persons within the statutes unless the intention of the legislature is manifestly to exclude them. Stribbling v. Bank, 5 Rand., Va., 132.

A county is a person in a legal sense, Lancaster Co. v. Trimble, 34 Neb. 752, 52 N.W. 711; BUT A SOVEREIGN IS NOT; In re Fox, 52 N.Y. 535, 11 Am.Rep. 751; U. S. v. Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 24 L.Ed. 192

Persons are the subject of rights and duties; and, as a subject of a right, the person is the object of the correlative duty, and conversely. The subject of a right has been called by Professor Holland, the person of inherence; the subject of a duty, the person of incidence. "Entitled" and "bound" are the terms in common use in English and for most purposes they are adequate. Every full citizen is a person; other human beings, namely, subjects who are not citizens, may be persons. But not every human being is necessarily a person, for a person is capable of rights and duties, and there may well be human beings having no legal rights, as was the case with slaves in English law.

A person is such, not because he is human, but because rights and duties are ascribed to him. The person is the legal subject or substance of which the rights and duties are attributes. An individual human being considered as having such attributes is what lawyers call a natural person. Pollock, First Book of Jurispr. 110. Gray, Nature and Sources of Law, ch. IL

Bottom line - if a man or woman WITHOUT a title and NOT a "person" (rights and duties and obligations prescribed) these do not apply. As a federal citizen one is a "person" with duties and obligations. A state national is a man or woman with a domicile on the land (Ohioan for example), no title, that is an American, not a federal citizen. As such, you have a lawful framework to refute all legal codes, rules, acts and statutes as they do not apply to you as a man or woman.

Expand full comment

I would not want to be in a bar fight with Sasha or Katherine.

I'm tough, but I'm A realist

Expand full comment

Thanks, I look forward to watching it later today. I'm so glad they put your and Sasha's great work into a video format. That will help spread it even more.

Expand full comment

Excellent video.

Denis Rancourt has done excellent work analysing overall mortality in the US during the "Covid Era." He starts, before the injections are rolled out, with the massive slaughter that happened in hospitals, nursing homes, etc. that was a result of the mandated protocols. The report cover excess mortality from the March 11th 2020 announcement of a "pandemic" to week-5 of 2022, corresponding to a total of 100 weeks.

His estimate for that time frame is that around 1.3 million people were killed due to the various "Covid measures." These individuals were mainly the elderly, the poor and the disabled.

What is that number here in early 2023- 10 months later?

Report here:


His video interviews are here:


This site which I'm guessing is organized by one of the author's of the video is an extraordinary compendium of information on just about anything you could want- it has been around for years.



Expand full comment

Probably a good idea to also post it on Rumble and Bitchute before the information Nazis take it down off YouTube.

Expand full comment

Thank you Katherine along with everybody that has put together this video. We the people are very grateful. God Bless you all.

Hell I'm not even half way through and the subversion of laws that were inconspicuously implemented through the years seems to be unconstitutional at best and implemented for where we are at worst. It's a total destruction of the constitution as well as loss of any personal freedoms. We the people are now servitude to the US government.

I will not go quietly into the night !

Expand full comment


Expand full comment

Really good! I shared it around.

Expand full comment

Hi Katherine, I absolutely love your substack. Your research, critical thinking, and writing skills make for a refreshing read. I really like the video linked in this post as well.

There is one thing I've been wondering about, though. Maybe someone can give some feedback on this. I've been watching Attorney Todd Callendar's videos since he first appeared on the scene and I've thought what he said made sense. One thing bothers me about him, however. He has said in at least three different interviews, including one from last week, that the HPV vaccine is required in all 50 states. It is not, by a long shot. Seems like a pretty major thing for him to be getting wrong and to keep repeating it. It makes me wonder about his credibility.

Anyone have thoughts on this?

Expand full comment