TrueLife - Quarantine & Isolation Camps in NYC

Starting point is 00:00:01 Darkness struck, a gut-punched theft, Sun ripped away, her health bereft. I roar at the void. This ain't just fate, a cosmic scam I spit my hate. The games rigged tight, shadows deal, blood on their hands, I'll never kneel. Yet in the rage, a crack ignites, occulted sparks cut through the nights. The scars my key, hermetic and stark. To see, to rise, I hunt in the dark, fumbling, fear. Hears through ruins maze, lights my war cry, born from the blaze.

Starting point is 00:00:40 The poem is Angels with Rifles. The track, I Am Sorrow, I Am Lust by Codex Serafini. Check out the entire song at the end of the cast. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to the True Life podcast. We are here with a fighter, a champion who's fresh off a battle in the ring with the state of New York City. Bobby Ann Cox, lawyer for the people. Why don't you take a moment just to introduce yourself, re-familiarize people with the case,

Starting point is 00:01:22 and then tell us about your big win. Yes, absolutely. Thanks for having me on, George. Nice to see you again. Thank you. Yeah, so for anybody that's not familiar, my name is Bobby Ann Cox. I'm based in New York.

Starting point is 00:01:35 I'm an attorney here for about 25 years. And I recently sued the governor of New York. Her name's Kathy Hokel. I sued her along with the Department of Health for the state of New York, along with the health commissioner for the state of New York, that's Dr. Mary Bassett, and also the health planning council here in the state of New York. And we basically were suing over this horrific regulation. It was called isolation and quarantine procedures. And it was was a regulation, which means it came through the Department of Health. It was not a law. It did not come from the legislature, our elected representatives. So the governor and the Department of Health made this regulation by themselves. And the regulation basically gave them the power to pick and choose which New Yorkers they could lock up or lock down because they thought maybe you had a communicable disease.

Starting point is 00:02:44 you didn't actually have to have the communicable disease. It was just they could think maybe you were exposed and that was enough and they could lock you down in your house or take you from your house and put you into a facility. And they got to decide how long you stayed there. So that means you could have been locked up or locked down in your house for days, for weeks, for months, no time limit at all. The regulation also did not have any time or any restraint on age. So they could do this to you. They could do this to your child, your grandchild, your grandparent. It was completely open as to who they could pick and choose. No restrictions. and they could also use local law enforcement to help them enforce their order of isolation or quarantine. So that means you could have literally gotten a knock on your door and, you know, it could have been

Starting point is 00:03:46 the local police or the sheriff, you know, saying, okay, sorry, you have to come with me because now we have this order of quarantine for you from the Department of Health. And there was no way for you to negotiate your way out. So if they issued this order to you, you couldn't then come back and say, well, wait a second, here. You know, I don't have tuberculosis or I don't have COVID-19. You know, I'll take a test. You know, I'll prove to you. Like, I do not have this, right?

Starting point is 00:04:16 No, there was no ability for you to negotiate at all. And in fact, when we were doing oral arguments in front of the judge a couple months ago, he specifically asked the attorney general's office, because the attorney. Attorney General is who represents the governor and the Department of Health. He specifically said, you know, if you have a family and you've put them into quarantine, like you put them into a facility or a hospital or whatever, how do they get out? Right. And the answer was, well, you know, they could hire a lawyer and they could, yeah, they could, you know, sue the governor and the Department of Health, you know, which as the judge then pointed out, you know, which as the judge then

Starting point is 00:05:00 pointed out is a very lengthy process. I mean, it took me, I started this case. I first filed it in the beginning of April. And I didn't get a decision until the beginning of July. So you're going to lock a family up for months while they try and find a lawyer and then try and sue and get out. I mean, it was just so, you know, ridiculous. This regulation was. so illegal and unconstitutional on many levels. So basically, I was representing, or I am representing, because the governor is now appealing the decision. But I am representing a group of New York state legislators,

Starting point is 00:05:47 Senator George Borrello, Assemblyman Chris Tague, Assemblyman Mike Lawler, and in essence, you know, our argument is separation of powers, the Constitution is clear, we have three, three branches of government. Each branch has their own thing that they're supposed to be doing, their own powers assigned to them. And you, governor and Department of Health, are in the executive branch. You're not allowed to take the power from the legislature, which is basically, you know, legislature makes law. This, they're calling a regulation, but really it's a law. And so you can't do that. You don't

Starting point is 00:06:30 have the power to do that. That is something that is reserved specifically and only for the legislature. And so the judge ruled in our favor. It was a great ruling. Judge Ron Plotz from it's New York, he's a New York State Supreme Court judge. And he ruled in our favor. He said, no, you cannot do this. You know, separation of powers. You can't have a regulation that conflicts with, number one, the Constitution. But it also can't conflict with New York state law because we all have New York state law, which says very clearly, if you want to quarantine or isolate somebody because they're a public health threat, here are all the steps you have to follow before you can actually remove the person from society. And this regulation conflicts completely with that law.

Starting point is 00:07:21 And we've had that law on the books for like 70 years, right? It's been around forever. So, you know, you can't do it. The judge struck it down. He said, sorry, you don't have this power. He deemed it null, void. And he actually barred them. He put an injunction in place. He barred them from trying to enforce this regulation.

Starting point is 00:07:44 So as of right now, in the state of New York, the governor of the Department of Health can no longer force somebody to isolate or quarantine because they think they might have had a disease. If they want to do that, they have to go through the law that's been on the books for decades, and that's the procedure you follow. Wow. It's such a huge win. I'm so I'm so thankful that, you know, people like you and you specifically have taken on this battle. And I think you did a pro bono. I think you did it because it's the right thing to do. And I think that that is part of not only the American spirit, but that is the foundation on which all of us must be fighting on.

Starting point is 00:08:27 Is this higher ideals? I think this is wrong. We're not going to do it. We already have laws. Let's stand up for the ones we have. I have another question for you. It seems to me, with my limited knowledge, that the state you're in right now is under two states of emergencies, be it COVID and maybe the monkeypox.

Starting point is 00:08:44 It seems to me that that's a very convenient way for people in authority to stress. if not override existing laws. Is that going to affect this particular situation that happened in the court case? Can they override it somehow with these state of emergencies? No. So the state of emergency, you are correct. New York is actually right now in three states. Oh, my God.

Starting point is 00:09:08 Two of them, which I wrote a substack on this a few days ago, two of them have to do with health, public health. One of them has to do with guns. So the governor declared a state of emergency over guns in New York. Okay, so we'll talk about, we could talk about that on another podcast, but sticking with the health and safety issue, yeah, she has declared, she has been declaring a state of emergency every 30 days since she took pretty much since she took office, which was last August, so a year ago. And that's in the name of COVID, right? Like, oh, COVID is, you know, this worldwide health emergency, blah, blah, blah, blah. You know, state of emergency in New York.

Starting point is 00:09:57 And, you know, people need to step back for a moment. And instead of just accepting that, they need to say, hang on a second. COVID first came around here in New York two and a half years ago, literally, two and a half years ago. Yeah, perhaps it was an emergency then. but do you think it's an emergency today, right? Like, do you know what an emergency is? I'm not sure that the definition of an emergency is very clear to Governor Hockel because an emergency means it is something that is immediate, an immediate threat.

Starting point is 00:10:33 It is going to harm you right this second. Is this a public health concern? Yes. Of course it's a public health concern. Is it a public health emergency? Not anymore. not two and a half years later, right? When we have completely done a ton of research on this thing, we have therapeutics, we have all

Starting point is 00:10:56 these drugs and all these, you know, we have everything, right? So, you know, she's doing it to just really have a power grab. And as you mentioned, there's a second health state of emergency here in New York now. This was just issued last week a few days ago. And that is over monkeypox. You know, again, is this a public health concern? Yes, it is. Is it a public health emergency?

Starting point is 00:11:25 No, it is not an emergency. But she's doing it because once she declares a state of emergency, it automatically triggers special powers to her. So as per the executive law that we have here in New York State, once there's a health, once there's any sort of a state disaster emergency declared, the governor gets extra powers that they don't normally have if it's not a state of emergency. And so in this case, she's got, you know, when you, when you're a governor, you declare state emergency, you can suspend laws.

Starting point is 00:12:01 I see. Okay. So think about that power for a second. You can suspend laws. That means you could say, okay, well, you know, we have this law, that law, blah, blah, blah, but I'm going to suspend them. They're not actually in effect now, right? That's a tremendous power. It's a tremendous power.

Starting point is 00:12:20 And then what we saw was, which, you know, I'm representing a group of New York State legislators on this case, Assemblyman George Barrello, sorry, Senator George Borrello, Assemblyman Chris Teague, Assemblyman Mike Lawler, together with the Citizens Group. But Assemblyman Chris Tague put out a statement a couple days ago and he said, you know, this, when you declare the state of emergency, you're allowed to now suspend laws. Well, what she did was she suspended a law and so the state no longer had to do bids when they gave out of money. So she, the governor, Hogle, hands out a multi-billion, not million, billion dollar contract. to a company to provide services to New York State, and that company has given her like hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign. Wow.

Starting point is 00:13:15 Yeah. Yeah. So somebody even Tague actually, you know, I'm not sure if he was joking or not, but he actually said, you know, should I put forth a bill, a proposed law that wants to change the name of New York from the Empire State to the pay-to-play state. Like it's just so obvious, right? I mean, it's unbelievable that, number one, that she's doing this, but number two, she's getting away with it, right?

Starting point is 00:13:45 And the way for her to not get away with it is she's running for election in November, right? So New Yorkers need to wake up and smell the coffee and go to the polls on November 8th and say, sorry, I am not voting for you. I'm going to vote for your opponent because you clearly don't have any regard for the Constitution. I mean, the fact that Hogle is appealing this decision, this quarantine camp decision, there's only one reason because she wants quarantine camps, right? There's no other reason to appeal this decision. And her opponent, Lee Zeldin, who's currently a congressman here in New York, he's one of our federal congressmen, but he's running for a governor against her. he has come out publicly and stated, no, I'm definitely not for quarantine camps. And, you know,

Starting point is 00:14:37 it's ridiculous that she's even appealing this case, right? So it's a clear choice. It's clear choice for New Yorkers, in my opinion, you know, do you want somebody who was acting tyrannically and completely violating the Constitution and New York state law and is appealing a decision, which is very clearly a sound legal decision. You know, it's not like there was, you know, some wishy-washy decision. This judge was clear, succinct. He really gave the exact reasons why he was throwing this regulation out and telling her, you can't do this. So it's unbelievable. She's going to waste so much taxpayer dollars fighting an appeal on this. So yeah, it's terrible. It's shameful, really.

Starting point is 00:15:33 Yeah, that's a great word for it. I was curious. A second ago you had spoke about Hogle giving no-bid contracts to a company for goods and services. Was that, were those contracts given to the same company that's building the quarantine camps? Is that the same company? Oh, no, no. So the regulation, the quarantine camp regulation, it specifically was, talking about the power to put people into quarantine. And that's either in their home or in a

Starting point is 00:16:06 facility. The regulation wasn't about like actual building like brick and mortar, you know, detention centers because the regulation said they could use any place as a detention center. Wow. So it literally said like they could take someone's private property, like an apartment a hotel, you know, anything like that that's, you know, got a lot where it's like multi-family, right, that they could commandeer private property for that purpose and or they could just use something existing, right? It was very broad. They could use, you know, one of the prisons that they've emptied out over the past couple years because that's what they've been doing in New York is setting criminals free. So it's really, it's really, it's, it's really.

Starting point is 00:16:55 really a broad-based language. But no, the pay-to-play did not have to do specifically with this regulation. So they could have, it's possible, it's possible that had you not fought this in one, they could have just used this regulation to command your people's businesses for anything. If it's such a broad and open law for interpretation, it could have been used to backdoor different business deals or just take maybe properties that were in distress or you could almost, I mean, it may be a bit of a stretch, but it kind of sounds like real estate acquisition to me at a very low price. Yeah. Well, it didn't. Yes, the provision, the provision I'm referring to in that regulation didn't say that they could take the property without compensation. It didn't say anything

Starting point is 00:17:43 about compensation or anything. So, I mean, technically when the government takes private property, for something or something they're supposed to compensate and whatever, whatever. But I'm just saying like overall speaking, it did have a permission in there that said they could basically use anywhere they wanted. And if they were going to use your private property as a facility for quarantining people, that you would not be allowed to enter unless you had permission from them. Right? And another. really scary thing that the regulation said was that they, the Department of Health, telling you what you could and couldn't do while you were in quarantine.

Starting point is 00:18:29 So that opened up a whole host of possible, I would say, you know, corruption, possible overstep, like a crudius overstep by the government, right? If they're saying, we can tell you what you can, so they could take the cell phone away. They could cut your internet access off. So you have no, no relations with the outside world. They could tell you what you couldn't, couldn't eat, how much you could eat, when you could eat. You know, it was so broad. It just said, we can tell you what you have to do when you're in quarantine.

Starting point is 00:19:10 They could have told you what medications you could and couldn't take or had to take. You know, it was, it was. so glaringly unconstitutional, you're supposed to have regulations or laws, either one, are supposed to have due process protections built in to safeguard the citizens so that the government doesn't abuse their power, right? And this regulation did not have any of that, didn't have any due process protections, no safeguards built in there. And the judge even said it, in his opinion, You know, he was very clear. He said that this rule, this regulation, basically gave lip service to due process, meaning there was no due process.

Starting point is 00:19:55 They said, they said, hey, we're going to do this in keeping with due process. But there wasn't one provision in there that said anything about protecting the person. It was just like a total power grab for the Department of Health. It was terrible. Yeah. So it brings up another point. And I would like to expand the picture outward, Bobby. You are on the front lines in the state of New York City.

Starting point is 00:20:20 And something I have learned living in the state of Hawaii is that Hawaii is kind of small. So you get to see how things play out on a small scale. And a lot of times, that's how things play out on a larger scale. And I'm curious what you have to say about this next piece here. And that is, as someone like yourself who's been on the front line, who's been fighting the good fight, you have explained what could almost be a hostile takeover of government by a corporate entity. Let's just say that the people suing one, and it's not exactly like this. And I don't want to get you in trouble or say that you said this.

Starting point is 00:20:56 However, it seems to me like it's almost a way for the health, the health department to take over the government. And it seems to me, or special interest to take over some of the governing, power of the people in the government. And it seems to me that that's kind of what's been done on the federal level. If you look at the way every president wants to be a wartime president, because when they're at war, they too can suspend laws. They too no longer have to do everything by the books if they're in a time of war. And I think that we could make the case that throughout the world, we have the world health

Starting point is 00:21:33 organization that is trying to create laws for the world now. And it seems to be like what's happening in New York was a smaller scale of that. Does that seem applicable? Well, I can definitely draw a correlation between the, what is going on in New York with the overreach by the executive branch and what we're seeing at the federal level with the overreach by the executive branch there. You know, last year we had the United States, last summer, we had the United States Supreme Court strike down the CDC regulation. So the CDC is the center for disease control. And they had issued a rule that said, you know, nationwide, landlords cannot evict their tenants for non-payment of rent because then it would lead to the spread of COVID, right? Which, first of all, it doesn't make sense.

Starting point is 00:22:28 But second of all, is completely unconstitutional, which I was, you know, yelling from the rooftops. You can't do this. This is unconstitutional. You know, and finally, last summer, it, it, it, it. The case made its way up to the United States Supreme Court, and they struck it down and they said, no, you're an agency. You can't. This is not within your power, right? This is not in your wheelhouse. Then we saw in January of this year, we saw the United States Supreme Court strike down another agency regulation, which was complete overstep. And that was with OSHA. And that OSHA decision was, you know, last year Biden told OSHA because Biden is executive. OSHA is an agency underneath the executive.

Starting point is 00:23:13 And he told them, make this rule. All employers in the United States that have 100 or more employees must require those employees to get the COVID-19 shot. Otherwise, if they don't, they have to test weekly. They have to wear a mask, you know, all day at work, whatever, whatever. So then that goes all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court rules, no, sorry, OSHA, you are an agency. You are in the executive branch. You do not have this power.

Starting point is 00:23:42 You can't do this. So they strike it down as unconstitutional. Then we just saw a couple weeks ago. The United States Supreme Court again strikes down this time an EPA. So the EPA is the Environmental Protection Agency. They strike down an EPA regulation, which basically they said this regulation is conflicting with existing federal law. You can't do that.

Starting point is 00:24:07 You're an agency. you're in the executive branch. This is not something you can do. You can't change law. You can't make law. And yeah, and so we've seen, you know, it's a trend of the courts are starting to shut down this gross executive branch overreach. We're seeing it at the federal level.

Starting point is 00:24:29 And now, thank goodness, we're seeing it at the state level in New York because you can't have an agency. in the executive branch making rules and regulations that conflict with law. It doesn't make sense because if you allow it, then what happens is now the executive branch and the agencies are up here. Now they've jumped up above the other branches of government. And all the branches, all three of them are supposed to be equal, right? They're supposed to be equal in power.

Starting point is 00:25:04 They just have different powers. And that's why our society has been sustained for almost 250 years because the way it's constructed is equal, right? Legislative branch is making the laws. They are equal with the executive branch, which is carrying out the laws. And then we've got the judicial branch, which is the judges and the courts, adjudicating everything in between, right? So it really needs, our Constitution needs to be upheld. if the executive branch would just stay in their lane, we wouldn't have all this tyrannical insanity going on in this country.

Starting point is 00:25:46 It's so true. Do you think that perhaps the reason the executive branch is so tyrannical is not only is it a failure of that branch, but it's sort of a failure of the legislative branch that no one really wants to be the bad guy and make a law. And so they agree to disagree and never solve any problems. I think there are various reasons for it. You know, I think in this case, in particular, with this quarantine camp regulation, the issue here was the legislature had the opportunity in New York State to make a law just like this regulation.

Starting point is 00:26:29 Right. There was a proposed law, a bill. that was put forth for seven years, including the two years during COVID. And it was very similar to this regulation, not exactly word for word, but very similar to this regulation. And the legislature in New York State, the senators and the assembly members didn't touch it. Literally, not one of them touched it. So you had the bill's author, which was Assemblyman Nick Perry, a Democrat from Brooklyn, New York. who's no longer an assembly member.

Starting point is 00:27:07 But he for seven years put forth this proposed law and nobody would get on board. No other assembly members got on board and not one senator picked it up to make a companion bill in the Senate. It was toxic. It was toxic. It was actually denounced by the head, who was also a Democrat, the head of the Assembly Health Committee, right? He said, we're not even putting this on the agenda.

Starting point is 00:27:34 Like, you know, don't worry about it, people. You know, so and then Perry, the assemblyman who proposed it, ends up withdrawing it in December of 2021 before he was appointed the ambassador to Jamaica by. The plot thickens. Yeah. So anyway, so that we already know here in New York State that our legislators, our elected representatives, the senators and the assembly members do not want a law like this. Okay?

Starting point is 00:28:06 So in our case, it wasn't like, oh, the legislature was too lazy to do it or didn't want to do it. Here, it was that the governor and Department of Health saw that this was getting no traction in the legislature. And they were like, oh, well, we'll just take it and make it a regulation. Because if we push it through one of the agencies, we don't have to deal with the senators and the assembly members. And we don't have to deal with the voters complaining to their senators

Starting point is 00:28:36 and their assembly members because we're an agency. We answer to nobody but the governor. Right? So it was just very sneaky. It was very unconstitutional. And I'm just, I'm thrilled that Judge Ronald Plotz struck it down

Starting point is 00:28:53 and really put it in very clear terms. So it was not a question mark. But yeah, this is this is exactly what's going on. Yeah, it seems like an interesting relationship between Nick Perry and the government. You know, it almost seems like there's a relationship there where they've thought about it and worked together to do something about it. I'm curious if the way the judge ruled on this is going to affect the appeal that the government is doing. I don't know. We're going to find out. They thus far, the Attorney General's office has filed a notice of appeal, which just says we are appealing this.

Starting point is 00:29:37 They have not actually filed the appeal argument yet. So I am not clear yet what their argument is on appeal. But we'll see. We'll see as soon as they file it. Nice. On the topic of strategy, when you have this case and you have won the battle, however, the war is unclear. it seems to me that they're setting up to set another front potentially. And as a litigator and as someone who has probably read from Sun Tzu to different generals

Starting point is 00:30:09 and all kinds of strategy and studied all kinds of laws, when you see that they're preparing for a appeal, do you in your mind sit back like, okay, here's probably what they're going to appeal or do you have like some sort of pregame strategy to think about what they might say and then start preparing your arguments before it even get started? Well, I'm sure they're going to appeal all the case. Yeah, I'm sure for that. But yeah, no, I definitely, I need to wait and see what they come out with on their appeal. It's just very interesting because the, as I said, before, the governor is running, she wants to be governor for another four years. So if you recall, for any of your viewers who might not know, the governor, Kathy Hochel, was actually. not elected. She didn't run for governor and get elected by the people. What happened was Governor Andy Cuomo was governor for many years, and she was his lieutenant governor. And then last year in August, he stepped down under, you know, scandalous conditions. And so when he stepped down,

Starting point is 00:31:18 she automatically rose from lieutenant governor to governor. So she's never run for governor, before. This is her first time. And yeah, she's running. She wants to be governor again. So she's got an election coming up. I am very surprised that she would try and take up this appeal, not just because it's a heinous regulation to begin with, but because she's running for election, right? So if New Yorkers, and I think this is why mainstream media for the most part is not picking up the story because she is running for election. and she does not want this to be out there. Right.

Starting point is 00:31:59 Same thing with our attorney general, Letitia James. She's also up for election in November. She wants another four years in her job. So I think the mainstream media is really not touching this because, you know, they're arms of the political state at this point. And they don't want people, they don't want the voters to know that they're appealing a decision because they want the power to force you into a,

Starting point is 00:32:26 quarantine facility? Come on. Right? So I think that's why, you know, there was an article in the New York Post about this. There was, I was interviewed by OAN news about this. I was just interviewed by Real America's voice about this. So there's a little bit of mainstream media like starting to pick it up sort of, but no, it's not, this is not something that is, you know, all over the news waves, as it should be, as it should be, right? Government. of New York tries to have the power to put you into a quarantine camp and it gets struck down and ruled as unconstitutional. That should be all over the place because people need to know, even if you don't live in New York, it's going to affect you. If she wins on appeal and she

Starting point is 00:33:16 gets that power back, don't you think all of a sudden now all the other states are going to say, well, wait a second here. New York can forcibly quarantine their citizens. Why can't week. Of course we can. Let's do it. Right. So it'll become a trend. It'll become like the new way to deal with diseases. Lock people up. Right. Like, hey, forget the masks. We can just throw them all into detention centers or lock them down in their homes. And come on, we saw what the lockdowns did a couple of years ago when COVID first hit. Absolute devastating results for children, for college kids, for adults, for adults, losing their jobs, losing their small businesses, can't pay the rent, losing their homes, absolute mess, absolute mess.

Starting point is 00:34:06 You know, that is not, that is not what we as a nation need to be doing, right? We need to be following the Constitution. And if there is somebody who's ill and is actually a public health. threat because the law that we have in New York, which we've had for 70 years, it's section 2120 of the public health law, it says the first thing you need to do if you want to quarantine somebody is first you have to prove they have the disease. Yeah. Right. It can't just be the Department of Health thinks maybe you do, maybe you don't, maybe you were exposed, maybe you weren't. No. You have to actually prove they have the disease. And then if they do have the disease, now they do have the disease,

Starting point is 00:34:52 now there has to be a whole investigation by a local, not state, a local health authority who tries to gather the evidence and see, you know, hey, is this person acting in a proper manner? Are they trying to protect other people or are they trying to hurt other people and infect other people, right? And there needs to be evidence and there needs to be a hearing in front of a magistrate. And it's only if the magistrate finds that the person is actually acting in an improper manner. And it's only if the magistrate finds that the person is actually acting in an improper manner. manner that they can then write an order of quarantine. It can't just be like, oh, yeah, yeah, you do have tuberculosis, so you do have to quarantine. No, they have to be acting like a poor citizen, right? Like in a rude manner, they have to be trying to spread the disease and trying to hurt other people around them. So, you know, but that law has a lot of protections built into it. And this regulation had none, not one. I mean, there wasn't one. Right.

Starting point is 00:35:56 So clear tyranny, just absolute clear tyranny. Yeah. I'm thankful for the American spirit and the ability for people, whether you're a man, a woman, gazed, whatever it is. I think that the American spirit resides in all of us. And it is this spirit of rebellion. Like, no, are you going to tell me to do that? And I'm not going to do it then.

Starting point is 00:36:20 And we stand up for each other when we know we're doing the right thing. And when I watch the news or I watch some media sometimes, it's easy to see the narrative people are trying to show like we're weak or we can't do it or there's no hope. But that's so not true. Just listening to the battle that you won and to know how much fight you have in you to do what's right and do it pro bono. I think that that's awesome. I'm really thankful for that. And I think it inspires other people to dig down deep and like, you know what, I can fight this too. And I think it's a good thing.

Starting point is 00:36:55 How are you doing on time? I know you probably have some other engagements or how you look at it? Yes. Unfortunately, I do have to run. But no, I thank you for your kind words and for pointing that out. I definitely, I'm hoping that my victory will encourage other people to stand up and do something. I was doing a podcast interview a week or so ago, and the host put up on the screen a picture of JFK

Starting point is 00:37:24 and a quote that he said, and it's really a powerful quote, which I really had not heard before. And she then had next to that a picture of me and she had a big thank you on there. But it said the quote from JFK was, you know, one person can make a difference and everybody should try.

Starting point is 00:37:46 So it's really powerful. And I hope that my story inspires people because this was a David versus Goliath story. You know, it's me. I'm not in. I used to be in a big New York City international law firm with, you know, hundreds of attorneys, you know, across the country and internationally.

Starting point is 00:38:03 But no, I mean, for the past, you know, probably 20 years, I've been out on my own with my own law firm. And I don't have the team of attorneys that Leticia James has in the Attorney General's office, right? I don't have, but she's got all our tax dollars to fight this appeal, right? And I don't. In fact, I'm not even getting paid. I'm doing it pro bono, right?

Starting point is 00:38:26 So obviously, my resources are limited. And I mean, people are giving donations, which is very, I'm very grateful for the donations that are coming in. But, yeah, it's David versus Goliath. And we know that in that story, right, Goliath loses. So I hope it does inspire other people. And if people want to get more information about the lawsuit, I can give you the website.

Starting point is 00:38:50 We actually have a website set up for the lawsuit specifically, that people can get a lot of information there. We have the judge's decision is linked there on the page. People can read that. They can read the regulation itself. There are photographs and videos and flyers, and there's a lot of stuff on the website, action items that people can do if they want to help and get involved.

Starting point is 00:39:12 And then there's the donate button. If people can donate, greatly appreciated. So that URL, it's www.uniting nys.com slash lawsuit. And I'm also on Substack. If people want to follow me on Substack, of course, it's free. If you want to do paid subscription, you can. But otherwise, the information is free.

Starting point is 00:39:38 And that's Attorney Cox. dot substack.com. So yeah, I'm really grateful you had me on again. And to do this follow-up interview, it's so great. Thank you. I really appreciate you covering the story. It's got, we've got to get the word out. So this is really fantastic.

Starting point is 00:39:56 Open invitation anytime. If something ever comes up, I would hope you'd reach out to me. And you would mention some other, what were, I think you had mentioned some other podcast. You want, is that, people wanted to go watch those. Are those linked on that? website that you mentioned as well? You know, a couple of them are.

Starting point is 00:40:14 Not all of them are linked on there. What are the other ones? Yeah. My substack is growing. I just started it about a week or two ago very recently. So that's growing and I will be adding all the videos slowly but surely onto the substack. People can also just do a search on Rumble.

Starting point is 00:40:36 I have my own channel on Rumble.com. It's called All Things Lawyer. But yeah, I mean, if you just can search my name, Bobby Ann Cox. But it's definitely, I mean, you know, Sue Peters picked up the story, who did an interview with him, Mel Kay, did a couple interviews with her. So it's getting, the words getting out, but there can never be enough. We really need to reach more people since it's being censored by mainstream media. That's it.

Starting point is 00:41:07 Ladies and gentlemen, you heard it here. reach out to her, follow her, support her, and maybe thank her for a big win that helps all of us. Thank you from everybody in my audience and in my family. Thank you, Bobby M for what you're doing. And I look forward to talking to you again real soon. Yes, absolutely. Thanks for having me, George. Absolutely.

Starting point is 00:41:26 All right. Aloha. Aloha. Okay, I can do that and then there.

TrueLife - Quarantine & Isolation Camps in NYC

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.