The Coming Medical Dictatorship-Can you guess what California Democrats want to make illegal?

Today, Canada. Tomorrow, California?

If that state's Democrats have their way, the Golden State could well become this nation's version of the Great White North.

Two bills introduced five days apart in the Assembly, the Legislature's lower house, expose the Democrats' plan to exploit COVID-19 to seize absolute power.

On Feb. 10, four Assembly members introduced AB 1993, a bill that would force anybody with a job -- whether full-time employees or independent contractors -- to prove they were vaccinated against COVID-19. The bill states its provisions would expire when “the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices determines that COVID-19 vaccinations are no longer necessary for the health and safety of individuals."

Then on Feb. 15, one of the members who introduced that bill proposed AB 2098, which would rescind the medical license of any doctor circulating "misinformation" about COVID-19 or vaccines designed to treat it.

Six Democrats are promoting both bills. They are Assembly members Buffy Wicks, Evan Low, Cecilia Aguiar-Curry and Akilah Weber, and state senators Richard Pan and Scott Wiener. Four other Democrats are among AB 1993's co-authors. Senators Bill Dodd and Josh Newman are listed as principal co-authors, with Assemblymen Bill Quirk and Mark Stone as secondary co-authors.

Low joined Wicks, Aguiar-Curry and Akilah Weber in presenting AB 1998 before introducing AB 2098 by himself. The second bill lists Aguiar-Curry, Weber and Wicks as co-authors. Pan and Wiener served as co-authors for both bills.

As FrontPage Magazine reported, Wicks tried to manipulate the legislative process last year to impose vaccine mandates. She used a technique called "gut and amend" to turn her own transportation bill, AB 455, into one demanding proof of vaccination for employees, contractors and anyone patronizing such businesses as restaurants, gyms and theaters. Only the Legislature's scheduled adjournment and Gov. Gavin Newsom's recall killed that revised bill.

Since Democrats hold 75 percent of the Legislature's seats, and since Newsom used the pandemic to impose emergency restrictions arbitrarily for nearly two years, both AB 1998 and AB 2098 have a serious chance of becoming law.

Not to be outdone, Newsom announced plans Feb. 17 to create "a brand new unit in State Government working full time on" stifling any information contradicting the narrative surrounding COVID+19 and vaccines. Newsom also said he has members of the Department of Health and Human Services “battling in the trenches and on social media trying to push back.”

In the process, Newsom called conservative outlets who challenge the narrative part of a "propaganda machine." Specifically, the governor cited One America News as a "great disinformation spreader," he said, and Fox News' "propaganda lineup," he said.

Why are California's Democrats so willing to undertake these blatantly unconstitutional measures? Follow the money.

Out of the 10 California Democrats involved with it, six took significant contributions from drug companies for their 2020 election campaigns. Aguiar-Curry received the most: $46,950. Johnson & Johnson, which suspended producing its COVID-19 vaccine, led all contributors with $6,200.

Low collected $38,100, with $6,500 coming from the three major vaccine producers: Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson. Pan, a pediatrician, received $31,700 from Big Pharma. That total included $5,000 from AstraZeneca.

Dodd accepted $23,100. More than one-fourth of Dodd's donations, $6,600, came from the three COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers. Out of the $19,000 Wiener received, 42 percent came from AstraZeneca ($2,000), Pfizer ($1,500) and PhRMA ($4,500), a trade association. Contributions from Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca ($2,000 apiece) constituted 25 percent of Quirk's $16,000.

Those figures “might be a pittance when it comes to campaign contributions at the federal level,” wrote Lev Facher from STAT News, which reports on the medical profession. But such contributions can “have a significant impact on a smaller, cheaper, and less scrutinized state election,” Facher added.

A survey from STAT News showed that 81.7 percent of California's legislators received campaign contributions from pharmaceutical firms for the 2020 election. That percentage ranks second nationally, behind only Louisiana. Pfizer donated to the most candidates, 1,048, in 43 states. Those candidates received $1.27 million. PhRMA contributed $1.58 million, more than any other manufacturer or industry group.

Big Pharma's attempts to influence state governments belong to a wider strategy described by Christopher Cole, the FDA's executive officer who specializes in medical countermeasures. In two undercover interviews by Project Veritas, Cole exposed the collusion between his agency and drug manufacturers.

"(FDA officials) know they're dependent on the drug companies, the vaccine companies and these other companies for their agency to operate," Cole said. "There's almost a billion dollars a year going into the FDA's budget from the people we regulate.

"Basically, we charge the industry millions of dollars in order to hire more drug reviewers and vaccine reviewers, which will speed up the approval process so they make more money. If they can get every person required at an annual vaccine, that is a recurring return of money going into their company."

COVID-19, therefore, means a financial windfall for vaccine manufacturers, who use Joe Biden as cover.

"Biden wants to inoculate as many people as possible," Cole said. "There's a money incentive for Pfizer and the drug companies to promote additional vaccinations. It'll be a recurring fountain of revenue. It might not be that much, initially, but if they can get every person required (to get) an annual vaccine, that is a recurring return of money going into their company.

That includes children, despite studies showing that children are the least likely to contract COVID-19.

"Schools are going to mandate it," Cole said. "They're looking at trying to inoculate kids between six months and 5-years old. Just from everything I've heard, they're not going to not approve it. I mean, it hasn't been formally announced yet because they don't want to rile everyone up."

The new book by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma and the Global War against Democracy and Public Health, reveals the massive corruption within the FDA, WHO and CDC. FrontPage Magazine recently interviewed the publisher, Tony Lyons.

In other words, contrary to AB 1993's language, the CDC will never declare COVID-19 vaccinations to be unnecessary as long as Big Pharma can make money from the now-weakening pandemic.

Now suppose both bills pass and Newsom creates his "anti-misinformation" agency. What will happen to Californians who refuse to get COVID-19 vaccines? What will happen to doctors who expose manipulated science or refuse to prescribe state-mandated treatments? What will happen to anybody who dares organize peaceful protests against excessive government power?

More importantly, does anybody seriously believe that California's Democrats would stop at COVID-19?

Perhaps a Canadian trucker could best answer those questions.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.