Mediaboss Marketing

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Monday, stopping the Department of Defense and the Biden administration from punishing U.S. Navy SEALs who object to getting the COVID-19 vaccine on the grounds of religion.

Attorneys with First Liberty Institute filed a federal lawsuit in November on behalf of 35 servicemembers. The lawsuit outlined that multiple plaintiffs have religious objections to getting immunized against COVID-19 because "the vaccines were developed, tested, or produced using aborted fetal cell lines."

Many of the SEALs have already contracted and recovered from COVID-19, while some have had antibodies tests showing that they acquired natural immunity.

In Monday's order, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor said, "The Navy service members, in this case, seek to vindicate the very freedoms they have sacrificed so much to protect. The COVID-19 pandemic provides the government no license to abrogate those freedoms. There is no COVID-19 exception to the First Amendment. There is no military exclusion from our Constitution."

CBN News previously reported that a new directive issued by the Navy states that if a SEAL declines the vaccine, the military could attempt to recover money that the government has spent on his training.

"Forcing a service member to choose between their faith and serving their country is abhorrent to the Constitution and America's values," said Mike Berry, general counsel for First Liberty Institute. "Punishing SEALs for simply asking for a religious accommodation is purely vindictive and punitive. We're pleased that the court has acted to protect our brave warriors before more damage is done to our national security."

"After all these elite warriors have done to defend our freedoms, the Navy is now threatening their careers, families, and finances. It's appalling and it has to stop," Berry said.

The news comes as the U.S. Navy and Air Force are being accused of giving blanket denials to all requests for religious exemptions from the military's COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

All branches of the military are required by law to evaluate religious accommodation requests (RAR's) on an individual basis to ensure due process under the Fifth Amendment and protect servicemembers' First Amendment right to religious freedom.

But the Navy has reportedly created a lengthy 50-step standard operating procedure to streamline the denials of the RAR's.

A Navy spokesman told CBN News in December there is no "blanket policy" about denying religious exemption requests. Each is allegedly considered on a case-by-case basis. There are, however, very strict guidelines that must be met, including a history of objecting to vaccinations. And anyone who refuses to get vaccinated, Christian or not, will be given a general discharge.

First Liberty points out that SEALs dedicate years of their lives in training to become the most elite fighting force. Yet, the Navy is willing to oust them or force them to repay the cost of their training simply because their beliefs keep them from receiving a COVID vaccine.

Meanwhile, dozens of congressional lawmakers recently announced their support for the group of Navy SEALs, arguing that their applications for religious exemptions from the mandate were unfairly denied.

"No right is more precious than the right to religious liberty," the lawmakers said in the brief addressed to Judge O'Connor. "That is why the very first clause of the very First Amendment explicitly states that 'Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise' of religion."

***Please sign up forCBN Newslettersand download theCBN News appto ensure you keep receiving the latest news from a distinctly Christian perspective.***

Read the original:
'No COVID-19 Exception to the First Amendment': Judge Sides with Navy SEALs Challenging Vaccine Mandate - CBN News

The riot at the U.S. Capitol still looms large in the minds of members of Congress who represent Virginia and Maryland.

Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., was on the Senate floor on Jan. 6, when a rioting mob invaded the U.S. Capitol in an effort to disrupt certification of the 2020 presidential election.

Less than an hour before people smashed windows and spilled inside the Capitol, Warner, a Democratic lawmaker, had been looking out at the protesters and reflecting on his duty to defend the Constitution.

It wasnt long before he and other lawmakers were being rushed away from the Senate chamber to shelter in place as angry and violent demonstrators started to break past overwhelmed U.S. Capitol police officers outside.

I still think about that one Capitol Police officer who led insurrectionists away from the Senate floor, Warner said, referring to Officer Eugene Goodman.

There couldve been much more damage, much more violence, Warner said. You couldve had members of the Senate killed if those folks who were out for blood had broken onto the Senate floor with the Senate still in session.

Warner still finds it chilling that the Senate parliamentarians office, which is responsible for securing the electoral votes linked to the presidential election, was totally trashed in a way that no other office was trashed (in) the Capitol.

Warner said there are still lots of questions that need to be answered about people who were allowed to take tours of the Capitol in the days before Jan. 6, which require assistance from lawmakers.

Democrats and Republicans both condemned the attack on the Capitol many as it was happening including Rep. Rob Wittman, a GOP lawmaker who represents Virginias 1st District.

But in the months that have followed, theres been a growing divide between congressional members of the two parties.

Democrats question whether some of the insurrectionists may have received assistance or guidance from Republican House members, which GOP lawmakers have denied.

The House select committee investigating the attack recently announced it is seeking testimony from some Republican lawmakers, including Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who spoke with former President Trump on Jan. 6.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said there is no question that what happened on Jan. 6 still reverberates on Capitol Hill.

What is even scarier right now is that this poison is still circulating in the political bloodstream, Van Hollen said. The poison that hit the Capitol on Jan. 6 is still very much alive in the body politic and weve got to address that as a country.

He and other lawmakers say there is a greater lack of trust between lawmakers of the two parties.

Ill confess it is harder to work with some of our colleagues that continue to promote the Big Lie, he said, referring to Republicans who continue to deny that President Joe Biden fairly won the election.

Van Hollen said those who promote false claims that former President Trump won the election are especially dangerous to our democracy.

Warner, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he believes appropriate steps have been taken to improve security at the Capitol.

But he was upset in the immediate aftermath of Jan. 6, noting he had been repeatedly assured by the FBI that appropriate steps had been taken to deal with the gathering of Trump supporters.

He and other lawmakers are encouraged by changes in intelligence sharing as well as procedures involving the activation of the National Guard.

The D.C. National Guard waited for hours as rioters fought with police officers before they were finally called in to help secure the Capitol.

Weve made additional investments, Warner said of increased funding for the Capitol Police, which includes money to hire more officers, pay for improved training and equipment.

I think its very important that we included the ability for the Capitol Police to call in the National Guard if they need additional help, God forbid something like this happens again, he said.

He said Capitol Police will continue to need improved access to intelligence related to potential threats and chatter on social media.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., agrees that important security improvements have been made.

But the Democratic lawmaker said threats remain, as long as congressional supporters of former President Trump continue to back his claim that he was cheated out of winning the election, even though there is no evidence of that.

The former president has suggested that the hundreds of people arrested have been unfairly prosecuted.

There are members of the GOP sadly, including elected members of the Senate and House, who are trying to sugarcoat and rewrite what happened that day, Kaine said.

The House select committee investigating the riot at the Capitol and what led to it plans to hold public hearings this year.

Up until now, much of the panels work has been behind closed doors. Hundreds of people have provided testimony, while some of Donald Trumps strongest supporters have refused to testify or pleaded the Fifth Amendment.

The House recently voted largely along party lines to hold former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in contempt of Congress, for failing to answer a subpoena.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democratic member of the select committee, said Meadows needs to answer questions related to texts he received before and during the insurrection.

Raskin of Maryland also said during a floor speech that Meadows lawsuit against the committee, which argues it has overstepped its power, is without merit.

Raskin said the Constitution gives Congress the power to suppress insurrections.

And this we will do by investigating and reporting on the most dangerous political violence ever unleashed against the Capitol by a domestic enemy, Raskin said.

Many Republicans argue that the select committee investigation is politically partisan, though the vice chair of the panel is Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo.

The committee hopes to release an interim report later this year.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-DC, said there is no getting around what happened nearly a year ago at the Capitol, even though some would like it to become a distant memory.

We still live in Jan. 6, she said.

I think try as they might, its impossible to whitewash Jan. 6, she said. It looms over us like a ghost, particularly over the Capitol.

Norton said for lawmakers to get past what happened in 2021, it will likely take years,

Were going to have to find ways, she said, and I think frankly itll take another election.

Go here to read the rest:
Jan. 6 looms over Capitol and Congress 'like a ghost' - WTOP

The U.S. Navy and Air Force are being accused of giving blanket denials to all requests for religious exemptions from the military's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. It's happening even though there are federal laws and regulations in place to prevent such a total and outright denial of religious rights.

Just the News reports all branches of the military are required by law to evaluate religious accommodation requests (RAR's) on an individual basis to ensure due process under the Fifth Amendment and protect service members' First Amendment right to religious freedom.

The news outlet reports Vice Admiral John Nowell, deputy chief of naval operations for manpower, personnel, training, and education, created a 50-step standard operating procedure streamlining the denials of the RAR's.

But according to a formal complaint bought by an anonymous Navy officer to the chief of naval operations, the lengthy review process is just for show.

The 50-step procedure is broken down into six phases. By the fourth phase of the review, even though it's designed to provide the appearance of individual consideration of a RAR, the denial template has already been added, numerous offices have endorsed the denial, and a drafted memo to Nowell requests a denial, according to Just the News.

However, a Navy spokesman told CBN News in December there is no "blanket policy" about denying religious exemption requests. Each is allegedly considered on a case-by-case basis. There are, however, very strict guidelines that must be met, including a history of objecting to vaccinations. And anyone who refuses to get vaccinated, Christian or not, will be given a general discharge.

The Air Force has also rebuffed allegations that it has issued a standard denial for all religious exemption requests.

On Monday, the military branch told Just the News, "The Department of the AF does an individualized least restrictive means analysis for each case."

On Dec. 22, the Air Force said it has received more than 10,000 RAR requests, but also revealed in the same press release that none of the requests had been approved. More than 150 were being appealed.

"Each member's request is carefully considered to balance the government's compelling interest in mission accomplishment with the service member's sincerely held belief," Under Secretary of the Air Force Gina Ortiz Jones said. "Although the chaplain may advise the member's belief is sincere, MAJCOM and FLDCOM commanders have to balance that member's interests against the overall impact on operational readiness, health and safety of members and good order and discipline within the unit."

According to Just the News, on Dec. 3, Maj. Gen. Sharon Bannister, director of medical operations in the Department of the Air Force office of the surgeon general, went on record, telling the District Court for Middle District of Florida, "The Air Force does not apply a 'blanket' rule that no less restrictive means of protecting the force exists other than a vaccination."

"The Approval and Appeal Authority must look at numerous factors that vary by individual," she continued. "The Department of the Air Force strives to make sure full and appropriate consideration is given to each request. Where an accommodation can be granted without adversely impacting the compelling government interest in mission accomplishment, it will be."

As CBN News reported in December, a growing number of U.S. service members say the military is stripping them of their religious liberties. Many of the COVID-19 vaccination deadlines for active-duty members have passed without a single religious exemption being granted.

"It goes against my bodily sovereignty as a Christian. I mean God makes it very clear. This body that I'm given is my last bastion of freedom," one Army National Guardsman told CBN News. At the request of legal counsel, he asked not to be identified.

He says he received other vaccines from the military without doing much research. But that wasn't the case with the COVID-19 shot.

In his request for a religious exemption, he cited fetal cell lines used in the research and development phase of the mRNA vaccines and in the production of Johnson & Johnson's shot. If his request isn't granted, he says he'll take a discharge before violating his beliefs.

First Liberty Institute is representing a group of 35 Navy SEALs seeking exemptions with similar concerns.

"There are various religious objections our clients have to the vaccine. Each of them prayed earnestly for God's direction and they do not feel they can, in good faith, take this vaccine. Also, many of them object because of the documented link between this vaccine and aborted fetal cells," Attorney Mike Berry said in a statement to CBN News.

Berry argues it's unconstitutional for their requests to be denied.

"That's blatant discrimination. You can't treat religious beliefs less favorably than you treat medical conditions or administrative exemptions. Religious freedom in our country is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and that doesn't change just because you serve in the military," Berry said.

In addition, late last month, dozens of congressional lawmakers announced their support for a group of Navy SEALs who sued the Biden administration and the Defense Department for refusing to grant religious exemptions to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

"No right is more precious than the right to religious liberty," the lawmakers said in the brief addressed to U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor. "That is why the very first clause of the very First Amendment explicitly states that 'Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise' of religion."

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told CBN News in December, religious exemptions are rare. For example, none has been granted in either the Navy or Marines in almost a decade.

"This is not about liberties it's about a military medical requirement to keep them safe, to keep their families safe, to keep their units safe and the Secretary continues to strongly believe that these vaccines are the best way to do it with respect to COVID," Kirby said

***Please sign up forCBN Newslettersand download theCBN News appto ensure you keep receiving the latest news from a distinctly Christian perspective.***

See the article here:
These 2 US Military Branches Stand Accused of Rejecting All Religious Exemptions to Vax Mandate - CBN News

Happy new year!

What better way to celebrate than with predictions for the coming year?

Ill start with a prediction you werent thinking about: Ron DeSantis will lose his race for governor of Florida in November.

I see two reasons why DeSantis will lose. First, an awful lot of people have died from COVID-19 in Florida, and thousands more will die in the coming months. Its going to turn out that repeatedly saying stupid things that result in the death of your constituents is not a good political strategy. The friends and families of all those dead people will remember that DeSantis is partly to blame, and theyll hold it against him at the polls.

Couple the COVID-19 problem with DeSantiss likely abortion problem. The Supreme Court will upset the Roe applecart during the first half of this year. DeSantis is pro-life, but Florida generally tilts the other way, and this will pose a problem for DeSantis. Combine a silly response to COVID-19 with a politically untenable response to abortion, and you have the surprise of the season: DeSantis will lose his governors race, and with it any chance to be the Republican nominee for president in 2024.

What other predictions do I have up my sleeve?

My second prediction is less surprising than the first: Liz Cheney will lose her seat in the House of Representatives in November.

I have a lot of respect for Liz Cheney, and probably many elected Republicans respect her, too; they just cant say so out loud. Cheney has made her small mark in the history books by daring to suggest that inciting a crowd to attack Congress is somehow wrong.

But earning your place in the history books and earning votes in todays Republican Party are two different things.

In heavily Republican Wyoming, the person who wins the Republican primary will of course win the general election for a seat in the House of Representatives. But Cheney will not win the primary, and shell be out of office come January.

No surprises there.

Prediction number three: Trumps legal woes will catch up with him in 2022.

A lot of people have been trying to get Trump under oath for a long time: The New York attorney general, many plaintiffs in civil cases, and the like.

Its possible to stall the legal system for a while, but its not possible to block it entirely unless youre the president, which Trump no longer is. Trumps federal lawsuit seeking to prohibit the New York attorney general from deposing Trump is doomed to fail, as anyone whos read the Anti-Injunction Act would know. Trump will be forced to appear for his deposition.

But Trump would be a fool to testify to anything substantive. Hell plead the Fifth Amendment, and then hell say that he never did anything criminal. Hell say he had to plead the Fifth to evade a Democratic witch-hunt.

But thats not all!

The plaintiffs in some of the civil cases will also finally get Trump under oath. Plaintiffs counsel in those cases will know the threat that expansive testimony poses to Trump, so those lawyers will of course encourage expansive testimony.

But thats not all!

The assorted prosecutors investigating Trump will also continue to pursue him during the year. My guess is that at least one of those prosecutors will indict him.

I cant foresee the precise result of all that testimony and all those cases, but it wont be good for Trump.

Finally, COVID.

I must say: I see two possibilities for the pandemic. One possibility is that several billion people are infected with the omicron variant in the coming months. That gives the virus billions of opportunities to mutate. Naturally, it does. Something far worse than omicron emerges from these rampant infections, and were back to April 2020 all over again.

The other possibility is that omicron is in fact less severe than the original virus. Omicron infects billions of people with a less dangerous illness, and those people all develop some level of resistance to future infections. (Health care systems around the world may well be challenged while that process runs its course, but Im looking longer term than that.)

In the United States, Democrats electoral success is tied to how well Biden handles the virus. He cant let the virus run wild and so imposes every vaccine requirement that the courts will permit. The vaccination programs, coupled with the natural spread of the disease, puts the country, and the world, in a much better place by the end of the year.

Although you cant always tell from my columns at Above the Law, Im an optimist.

Im going with the second version of my COVID-19 visions, and Im predicting that the country, and the world, will be nearing the end of the COVID-19 pandemic by December 31, 2022.

And if Im wrong?

Ill be so terribly depressed that my regret for one silly prediction will be lost in the sea of melancholy.

So instead lets end on a bright note: I hope your 2022 is a happy and healthy one! Or, as someone recently said, Stay positive. Test negative.

MarkHerrmannspent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and is now deputy general counsel at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeons Guide to Practicing LawandDrug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy(affiliate links). You can reach him by email atinhouse@abovethelaw.com.

See original here:
Four Predictions For 2022 - Above the LawAbove the Law - Above the Law

Item 5.02 Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors;Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.(e) On October 28, 2021, the Board of Directors (the "Board") of CommunityHealthcare Trust Incorporated (the "Company"), at the recommendation of thecompensation committee of the Board (the "Committee"), authorized and approvedthe Sixth Amendment (the "Wallace Sixth Amendment") to the Employment Agreementby and between the Company and Timothy G. Wallace (the "Wallace EmploymentAgreement"), the Third Amendment (the "Dupuy Third Amendment") to the EmploymentAgreement by and between the Company and David H. Dupuy (the "Dupuy EmploymentAgreement"), the Third Amendment (the "Stach Third Amendment") to the Amendedand Restated Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Leigh Ann Stach(the "Stach Employment Agreement"), and the First Amendment (the "Meyer FirstAmendment") to the Employment Agreement by and between the Company and TimothyL. Meyer (the "Meyer Employment Agreement"). These amendments to each respectiveemployment agreements were executed on January 4, 2022 and were effective as ofJanuary 1, 2022.Wallace Employment AgreementThe principal change in the Wallace Employment Agreement resulting from theWallace Sixth Amendment is to increase the base salary paid by the Company toTimothy G. Wallace for his employment as President and Chief Executive Officer("Wallace Base Salary"). In 2021, the Wallace Base Salary was $750,000.00. TheWallace Sixth Amendment increases the Wallace Base Salary to $794,200.00 for2022, which is a $44,200.00 increase from 2021.The foregoing descriptions of the Wallace Sixth Amendment to the WallaceEmployment Agreement are qualified in their entirety by reference to theoriginal Wallace Employment Agreement, which is included as Exhibit 10.6 to theRegistration Statement on Form S-11 of the Company filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the "SEC") on April 2, 2015, the first amendment to theWallace Employment Agreement, which is included as Exhibit 10.1 to the CurrentReport on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 18, 2017, the second amendmentto the Wallace Employment Agreement, which is included as Exhibit 10.1 to theCurrent Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 2, 2018, the thirdamendment to the Wallace Employment Agreement, which is included as Exhibit 10.1to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 3, 2019, thefourth amendment to the Wallace Employment Agreement, which is included asExhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 3,2020, the fifth amendment to the Wallace Employment Agreement, which is includedas Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January4, 2021, and the Wallace Sixth Amendment, which is included as Exhibit 10.1 tothis Current Report on Form 8-K, and are incorporated by reference into thisItem. The foregoing description of the Wallace Sixth Amendment does not purportto be complete and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such exhibits.Dupuy Employment AgreementThe principal change in the Dupuy Employment Agreement resulting from the DupuyThird Amendment is to increase the base salary paid by the Company to David H.Dupuy for his employment as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer("Dupuy Base Salary"). In 2021, the Dupuy Base Salary was $460,000.00. The DupuyThird Amendment increases the Dupuy Base Salary to $487,200.00 for 2022, whichis a $27,200.00 increase from 2021.The foregoing descriptions of the Dupuy Third Amendment to the Dupuy EmploymentAgreement are qualified in their entirety by reference to the Dupuy EmploymentAgreement, which is included as Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-Kfiled with the SEC on March 11, 2019, the first amendment to the DupuyEmployment Agreement, which is included as Exhibit 10.2 to the Current Report onForm 8-K filed with the SEC on January 3, 2020, the second amendment to theDupuy Employment Agreement, which is included as Exhibit 10.2 to the CurrentReport on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 4, 2021, and the Dupuy ThirdAmendment, which is included as Exhibit 10.2 to this Current Report on Form 8-K,and are incorporated by reference into this Item. The foregoing description ofthe Dupuy Third Amendment does not purport to be complete and is qualified inits entirety by reference to such exhibits.Stach Employment AgreementThe principal change in the Stach Employment Agreement resulting from the StachThird Amendment is to increase the base salary paid by the Company to Leigh AnnStach for her employment as Executive Vice President and Chief AccountingOfficer ("Stach Base Salary"). In 2021, the Stach Base Salary was $387,600.00.The Stach Third Amendment increases the Stach Base Salary to $410,500.00 for2022, which is a $22,900.00 increase from 2021. 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edgar Online, source Glimpses

Here is the original post:
COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE TRUST INC : Change in Directors or Principal Officers, Financial Statements and Exhibits (form 8-K) - marketscreener.com