Forbes Reports of Fetal Neurological Damage Due to Coronavirus
Bad Kindergarten Cop - Colorado Teacher's Vicious Facebook Post About Special Needs Students

Richard Jaffe, Esq Reviews The Kennedy Dershowitz Vaccination Debate

07-17-20-Dershowitz-2_Featured_Image-800x417Below is an excerpt from attorney Rick Jaffe's review of the debate between Robert Kennedy and Alan Dershowitz last week.

The Kennedy-Dershowitz Debate: Must See TV! July 27, 2020 Richard Jaffe

A few days ago, the Bobby Kennedy/Alan Dershowitz debate was released. As a lawyer involved in the vaccine issue, it was very heartening to see such a high quality debate on the subject. It was very enjoyable to watch these two extremely smart, deep thinkers talk about these issues with open mindedness, clarity and mutual respect for each other, and for the opinions of the other with which they did not agree. I can’t personally recall anything like this ever happening in the vaccine area. I hope that there will be more of them.

If you haven’t seen or shared it on social media, please do. If you have seen and shared it, share it again! Here is a link:

I made some notes and have some thoughts about what I particularly liked about the debate, and I thought I’d share them.

First, it wasn’t so much of a debate as a discussion among two people with very different areas of expertise. AD is a long-time legal scholar and extremely well versed on constitutional law. Bobby Kennedy is a health and environmental advocate, and knows a zillion times more about the science and policy than AD. Bobby himself acknowledged the differences in their areas and expertise and jokingly said he would try to keep the discussion on the science and policy rather than constitutional law. And he succeeded in doing so, providing AD with a much-needed education of the many of the mainstream-suppressed scientific facts concerning vaccines.

AD’s basic initial and general point was that based on Jacobson and other cases, the government had the right under its police powers to forcibly inject everyone with vaccines.

BK thanked AD for participating in this debate and lamented the difficulty he has had getting people on the other side (like Offit and Hotez) to debate him.

BK correctly pointed out that Jacobson didn’t force anyone to get a vaccine. It only upheld a law that mandated a small pox vaccine or pay a $5.00 fine. AD came back that there were other cases which upheld compulsory medical procedures. The debate didn’t get into the specifics, but AD was talking about Buck v Bell, a case from the late 1920’s in which Oliver Wendall Holmes upheld a Virginia law for forced sterilization for a woman (incorrectly) claimed to be mentally defective. The most significant eugenics-like quote from the opinion was that “three generations of imbiciles are enough.” AD didn’t talk about that case, which is probably a good thing, since it is viewed as one of the worst Supreme Court decisions ever (along with the Dred Scott and the Korematsu decisions). (Here is an article about OWH which discusses the opinion, for anyone interested.

My comment: I think BK is correct that forcibly injecting people with vaccines is fundamentally different from the issue in Jacobson. In addition, it has been over a hundred years since our government has had mandatory universal adult vaccines. That, plus the likely shortages of a COVID-19 once it is released could mean that the issue of a mandate for the vaccine will not come up. The caveat is that, despite the shortages and priorities of vaccine delivery, some states try to pass mandatory vaccine laws, either for adults or for children. That is something we’ll have to watch out for.

BK made the important point that unlike almost every other medical procedure, vaccines are given to healthy people, so there should be a higher standard for safety.

My comment: that argument should resonate with open-minded people.  READ THE FULL REVIEW HERE.




I saw John F. Kennedy as a child in Detroit. He was beloved by the nation as was his brother Robert.

His son stirs echoes of the past with this offering. A true example of why lawyers and judges should not be making health care law.

Although he did not teach me much he confirmed a tremendous amount of information that I have known for years and despite thinking that scurvy is an infectious disease and misquoting the vaccine act as 1996 instead of 1986 BK was spot on.

I have never seen AD so quite before and lack any significant contribution other than a hypothetical question or 2.

This is a must see for any person who wants the truth about the entire situation in a few minutes and it comes down to one word MONEY


Laura Hayes

Powerful 5-minute video I wanted to share with AoA readers. Have a watch! It is right at the start of this article by Dr. Mercola. I don't know who the speaker, Jeremy Elliott, is, but what he says is powerful, succinct, and spot on.

Tim Lundeen


I agree -- "vaccine experts" will not debate anyone knowledgeable, because you cannot make a case for vaccines. The harm they do swamps any benefits, and the evidence for this is overwhelming.

Bob Moffit

Jaffee writes:

"First, it wasn’t so much of a debate as a discussion among two people with very different areas of expertise."

Indeed .. it was a discussion of vaccine safety and efficiency between one .. RFK .. well versed on that issue … and .. one .. AD .. who revealed he knew nothing about the issue under "discussion".

Jaffee continued:

"AD asked BK to agree that vaccines have been spectacularly effective in the past like with polio and small pox. BK said it was a complicated issue and cited literature about how it was sanitation and other public health measures, rather than the vaccines. Since this isn’t AD’s wheelhouse, he didn’t have much to say in response. BK would have had a much harder time with a vaccine expert, and I would think that this would be where the debate would have broken down, with the vaccine expert calling BK a crazy anti science anti vaxxer."

I wholly disagree with Jaffee's observation .. "BK would have had a much harder time with a vaccine expert" … if that were the case ,, DECADES AGO … RFK would have been subjected to a nationally televised debate where vaccine "experts" publicly ridiculed him for his lack of scientific expertise.

It is a whole lot easier for "vaccine experts" to have someone like Jaffee parrot the vaccine experts highly successful strategy of labelling RFK a "crazy anti-science anti-vaxxer" without having the DEBATE.

If as Jaffee suggests … vaccine experts would give RFK a "much harder time" .. WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE SO? The "experts" refuse to have that DEBATE because they know they would LOSE EVEN MORE PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR THEIR INSANE VACCINE PROLIFERATION.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)