The impetus for this interview was for Martin to back up his public “virus” assertions, hence Alec’s line of questioning. Martin was fully aware of this going in. He agreed to it.
I don’t know a single no-virus person who claims that there is 1 and only 1 cause of any illness. Quite the opposite in fact. They are the ones who have been discrediting that notion, while Martin’s clear-as-mud presentations have left millions of people convinced that there really was an engineered “virus”. “We created SARS! They patented SARS-COV-2 spike protein!”.
Martin also danced around Alec’s straightforward question about the existence of “the virus” (the alleged particle), successfully avoiding that discussion entirely (thereby avoiding any acknowledgement of fake-isolation and fake-sequencing, bogus animal studies, EM nonsense), and implied that scientific method is incapable of demonstrating that anything causes anything – which will make covid dissenters look completely ridiculous.
Where is Martin attempting to legally hold anyone accountable for making up a virus story, or expose the falseness of the virus story in court? Contrary to the assertion he made to Alec, that is not at all what I’ve seen indicated in the publicly-available court paperwork of the case he was involved in.
Martin’s FB about the lawsuit:
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10159805790213187&set=a.130626623186
The website he was promoting no longer loads:
https://prosecutenow.io/
The exhibits for this case were all about “the virus” and “variants”:
https://dockets.justia.com/docket/utah/utdce/2:2022cv00149/130857
And lol:
“Filing 3 Modification of Docket: Error: Plaintiff filed against themself. Correction: Docket text has been modified to reflect complaint is filed against defendants rather than plaintiff;“
and
“Filing 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Memorandum in Support , MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM”
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Personally I don’t think it’s lawful, ethical or useful in the long run to go along with a false narrative in court.