Biden, The Hapless Poser King With His Court
Segment #847
The "No Kings" Rally: A Year of Absurd Contrast
The primary duty of the President of the United States is to ensure the safety and security of the American people. From this perspective, the physical and economic harm experienced by thousands of individuals under the Biden administration's Covid mandates represents a significant failure of that responsibility.
President Joe Biden outlined a plan to either vaccinate or test employees of businesses with more than 100 employees, and requiring federal workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19 affecting over 100 million workers
For the past year, we have observed the "No Kings" rally as a sharp, absurd commentary on an administration that stands in total opposition to the mandate-heavy Biden White House.
In this view, Biden was portrayed as a hapless poser—a leader who operated under the delusion of monarchical power while being shielded by a circle of enablers. Surrounded by handlers who reinforced this sense of authority, he leaned on a political base that chose to look past the "stumbling and bumbling" nature of his presidency. Ultimately, he was the definition of a poser: a man who didn't have the slightest clue what he was doing, yet occupied the highest office as if he were royalty.
The Democratic Leadership: The "Hapless Poser" Quartet
From a conservative viewpoint, Biden, Schumer, Jeffries, and Pelosi represent a "regency" of posers—people who wear the regalia of office but are increasingly bullied by the "hapless" reality of their own results.
Joe Biden (The Hapless Figurehead): He is often portrayed as the ultimate hapless leader. The "poser" aspect is seen in his appeals to "Middle-Class Joe" or the "tough statesman" while, in the conservative view, he is physically and cognitively "tripping over his cape" on the world stage. The universe—via inflation, border crises, or botched withdrawals—seems to constantly highlight his lack of actual control.
Schumer & Jeffries (The Script-Readers): These are seen as the "posers" of legislative mastery. Conservatives often argue they lack the genuine "lion-like" conviction of past leaders, instead performing a scripted version of progressivism to satisfy their base, while actually being "hapless" to stop the internal fracturing of their own party.
Nancy Pelosi (The Aesthetic of Power): Even in her "emeritus" role, she is viewed as the one who perfected the "costume." To a conservative, her power was never about vision, but about the performance of the gavel—the designer suits and the staged photo-ops (like the Kente cloth kneeling or the document ripping) that lack "depth" because they don't solve the underlying "hapless" decay of the cities she represents.
mRNA Covid Vaccine Mandate
The fight over vaccine mandates continues across the country. More companies are requiring workers to get the vaccine, and refusing the shot could impact your ability to get unemployment benefits.
The Covid vaccine was sold mandated both federally and in the private sector as fully approved vaccine. It was a lie and a carefully orchestrated deception. It is a common point of confusion, and there were several layers of legal and logistical nuance that made the rollout feel deceptive to many. To be clear, you’re right that there was a distinction between the "authorized" and "approved" products, but the reason behind it is often tied to how federal law handles medical supplies during an emergency.
Here is a breakdown of what happened with Comirnaty and the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA vaccine.
1. The Legal Distinction: EUA vs. BLA
In August 2021, the FDA granted a Biologics License Application (BLA) to Pfizer-BioNTech for its vaccine, which was then branded as Comirnaty. This meant it was "FDA-approved." At the same time, the FDA extended the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the existing Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine stock. Legally, these are two different pathways:
EUA: A temporary authorization for unapproved products used during a public health emergency.
BLA (Comirnaty): A permanent license for a product that has met the full standard for FDA approval.
2. The "Interchangeability" Issue
The source of the frustration for many—including federal workers facing mandates—was that the FDA stated the EUA-labeled vaccine and the BLA-approved Comirnaty were "formulation-wise" the same and could be used interchangeably. However, from a legal standpoint, they were not identical. The EUA version came with different liability protections (under the PREP Act) than a fully licensed product. Because the physical vials labeled "Comirnaty" were not yet in wide circulation, people were being injected with EUA-labeled vials while being told the vaccine was "approved."
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Monday granted the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine full approval in a highly anticipated move that’s expected to boost vaccinations and spark more mandates nationwide.
3. Why Comirnaty Wasn't "Available"
You mentioned it wasn't generally available. This was largely true in the months following approval. Pfizer had millions of doses of the EUA-labeled vaccine already manufactured and distributed. Under federal law, they were required to exhaust that supply before switching entirely to the newly labeled Comirnaty stock.
As COVID-19 vaccine mandates go into effect across the country, many first responders are set to lose their jobs for not getting vaccinated. Jeff Pegues takes a closer look at what this means for first responders as well as public safety.
4. Impact on Mandates
For federal workers and military members, the "approval" of Comirnaty was the legal trigger used to justify vaccine mandates. Critics argued that since Comirnaty-labeled vials weren't actually at the clinics, the mandate was forcing people to take an EUA product, which usually requires "informed consent" (the right to refuse).
The government’s counter-argument was that because the FDA declared the products interchangeable, the "approval" applied to the medicine itself, regardless of which sticker was on the bottle.
It’s easy to see why this felt like a "bait and switch." While the medicine inside the vial didn't change, the legal label and the rights of the recipient shifted significantly.
Does this help clarify why there was such a gap between the announcement of "approval" and the actual appearance of Comirnaty in clinics?
Giving military vaccine refusers their jobs back and back pay is a bad idea, according to Virginia U.S. Sen. Mark Warner. Some 8,400 troops were separated from service over the last year for failing to get their COVID-19 shots, but that mandate was recently lifted.
Between August 2021 and January 2023, approximately 8,000 to 8,500 active-duty and reserve service members were involuntarily discharged from the U.S. military for refusing to comply with the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
While many others left voluntarily as their enlistments ended to avoid the requirement, the "involuntary" figures refer specifically to those separated for failure to obey a lawful order.
Breakdown of the Impact
Total Discharges: Official Pentagon figures consistently cite "nearly 8,000" or "8,400+" service members across all branches (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard).
Character of Discharge: Initially, about 4,000 of these members received "General Under Honorable Conditions" discharges, which made them ineligible for certain benefits like the GI Bill. The remaining majority received "Honorable" discharges.
National Guard & Reserves: Beyond the involuntary active-duty discharges, an estimated 60,000 National Guard and Reserve members were barred from participating in drills or training at the peak of the mandate, resulting in lost pay and retirement credit.
Recent Reinstatement Efforts (2025–2026)
Following the rescission of the mandate in early 2023, significant policy shifts occurred under the Trump administration starting in January 2025:
Executive Order 14184: Signed in early 2025, this order established a pathway for those discharged to be reinstated to their former rank with back pay and corrected service records.
Deadline Extension: As of March 2026, the Department of War (formerly the Department of Defense) extended the deadline for these "warriors of conscience" to return to service until April 1, 2027.
Reduced Service Obligation: To encourage experienced members to return, the required service commitment for those rejoining was reduced from four years to two years.
Progress: Several branches have already begun bringing members back; for example, the Coast Guard reinstated 56 members in February 2026, and the Air Force has proactively upgraded hundreds of discharge records from "General" to "Honorable" to restore full benefits.
Private Sector
While exact numbers for the private sector are not tracked in a single government database, we can pinpoint the scale by looking at the compliance rates of major firms and broader labor surveys.
The Numbers at a Glance
Total Estimate: Approximately 1% to 3% of the unvaccinated workforce in mandate-heavy sectors (roughly 150,000 to 300,000 people) were fired or resigned.
Compliance Dominance: Across nearly all large private firms, 95% to 99% of employees complied once termination was the stated consequence.
The "Great Resignation" Factor: Millions of workers left their jobs in 2021–2022; while vaccine mandates were a cited reason for roughly 5% of the unvaccinated, most departures were driven by burnout, pay, or remote work demands.
Specific Examples (The "1% Rule")
Most major companies that enforced mandates saw less than 1% of their staff actually terminated:
CompanyTotal EmployeesTotal Terminated% of WorkforceUnited Airlines67,0002320.3%Mayo Clinic73,0007000.9%Houston Methodist26,0001530.6%Tyson Foods120,000< 500< 0.5%
Key Findings
Hospitals were the epicenter: The healthcare sector saw the highest volume of losses. For example, New York state reported roughly 33,000 healthcare workers (out of 500,000+) were terminated, retired, or placed on unpaid leave due to the state-level private mandate.
The "Cliff" never happened: Fears of a 30% labor shortage proved unfounded. Most workers who initially protested eventually accepted the vaccine to remain employed.
Judicial Intervention: In early 2022, the Supreme Court blocked the OSHA mandate for large employers (100+ employees), which stopped an estimated 20 million+ workers from facing immediate termination deadlines.
The 2026 Legal Landscape
As of April 2026, the primary "correction" for these job losses is happening in courtrooms. Several major private settlements have recently been reached where companies are paying $25,000 to $150,000 per person to settle wrongful termination and religious discrimination suits, though mass "reinstatements" (unlike the military) remain rare in the private sector.
Injuries and Deaths Due to Covid mRNA vaccine
We are only six years out from the start of the vaccine program, so at best the casualty totals are incomplete.
2. Dr. Peter McCullough & Dr. Robert Malone
These doctors argue that VAERS is "under-reported" by a significant margin (citing the Harvard Pilgrim Study which suggested only 1% of injuries are reported).
Death Estimates: Dr. McCullough has frequently testified that the true death toll in the U.S. likely exceeds 500,000 to 600,000, based on applying an "Under-Reporting Factor" (URF) to the raw VAERS numbers.
Injuries: They point to "Spikeopathy"—the prolonged presence of the spike protein in the body—as the cause of a broad "Post-Vaccination Syndrome." They estimate millions of Americans have suffered "sub-clinical" heart damage (scarring that doesn't show up on a standard EKG but may lead to future issues).
3. Dr. Marty Makary & Dr. Paul Marik
These experts often focus on "the data they aren't telling us," specifically regarding younger populations.
Dr. Marty Makary: He has been critical of the lack of transparency regarding specific "healthy child" deaths. He recently cited reports suggesting at least 10 children died from the vaccine—a figure he argues the FDA "buried" or failed to investigate properly. His focus is often on the risk-benefit ratio for those who already have natural immunity.
Dr. Paul Marik: As a leader of the FLCCC, Marik focuses on the Post-Vaccine Syndrome (PVS). His group treats thousands of patients and estimates that roughly 1% to 3% of all vaccine recipients may experience some form of chronic "vaccine injur