Attorney Sidney Powell Files 104 Page BOMBSHELL COMPLAINT of Massive Fraud in Georgia Election
Flynn Attorney Abigail Frye posted this moments ago:
The Kraken came down to Georgia on this Thanksgiving Eve in the form of a 104 pg BOMBSHELL complaint exposing the massive fraud that overwhelmed the 2020 Georgia Elections. Georgia, you are most certainly on our minds. Link to filing to come, stay tuned!
Here’s one of the BOMBSHELLS in the report:
They are calling for 96,000 votes to be tossed!
page 10
Additionally, incontrovertible evidence Board of Elections records demonstrates that at least 96,600 absentee ballots were requested and counted but were never recorded as being returned to county election boards by the voter. Thus, at a minimum, 96,600 votes must be disregarded. (See Attached hereto, Exh. 9, R. Ramsland Aff.)
UPDATE — HERE IS WHAT POWELL IS ASKING FOR Pgs 100-102
For these reasons, Plaintiff asks this Court to enter a judgment in their favor and provide the following emergency relief:
1. An order directing Governor Kemp, Secretary Raffensperger and the Georgia State Board of Elections to de-certify the election results;
2. An order enjoining Governor Kemp from transmitting the currently certified election results to the Electoral College;
3. An order requiring Governor Kemp to transmit certified election results that state that President Donald Trump is the winner of the election;
Pg. 101
4. An immediate order to impound all the voting machines and software in Georgia for expert inspection by the Plaintiffs.
5. An order that no votes received or tabulated by machines that were not certified as required by federal and state law be counted.
6. A declaratory judgment declaring that Georgia Secretary of State Rule 183-1-14-0.9-.15 violates the Electors and Elections Clause, U.S. CONST. art. I, § 4;
7. A declaratory judgment declaring that Georgia’s failed system of signature verification violates the Electors and Elections Clause by working a de facto abolition of the signature verification requirement;
8. A declaratory judgment declaring that current certified election results violates the Due Process Clause, U.S. CONST. Amend. XIV;
9. A declaratory judgment declaring that mail-in and absentee ballot fraud must be remedied with a Full Manual Recount or statistically valid sampling that properly verifies the signatures on absentee ballot envelopes and that invalidates the certified results if the recount or sampling analysis shows a sufficient number of ineligible absentee ballots were counted;
Pg. 102
10. An emergency declaratory judgment that voting machines be Seized and Impounded immediately for a forensic audit—by plaintiffs’ expects;
11. A declaratory judgment declaring absentee ballot fraud occurred in violation of Constitutional rights, Election laws and under state law;
12. A permanent injunction prohibiting the Governor and Secretary of State from transmitting the currently certified results to the Electoral College based on the overwhelming evidence of election tampering;
13. Immediate production of 36 hours of security camera recording of all rooms used in the voting process at State Farm Arena in Fulton County, GA from 12:00am to 3:00am until 6:00pm on November 3.
14. Plaintiffs further request the Court grant such other relief as is just and proper, including but not limited to, the costs of this action and their reasonable attorney fees and expenses pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988.
by Peter Santilli, Commentator & Investigative Journalist
On October 15, 2020, almost a billion people — including myself — were silently and abruptly disconnected from their trusted independent media sources by Google and Youtube.
It is estimated that the world’s top 50+ independent researchers who published their investigative content on Youtube had their accounts terminated, and their entire library of evidence was deleted from public view.
On October 26th, a group of researchers filed an emergency injunction to have their Youtube accounts reinstated, and a northern California federal district court ordered Google to respond to the emergency request no later than Friday October 30, 2020.
Quite frankly, their response was shocking, yet very revealing.
Please allow me to begin describing the significance of these legal proceedings by reminding everyone what we’ve been experiencing over the past several weeks with the main stream media’s cover-up of “Hunter Biden’s Laptop From Hell”. I can go even further by reminding everyone that we have yet to see results of the FBI’s investigation of Anthony Weiner’s laptop, which was recovered by NYPD in 2016.
On Friday October 30th, Google’s attorney’s filed an “OPPOSITION” to the researchers’ request for re-instatement of their body of work (criminal investigations). In my professional & well-informed opinion, the most accurate way to describe Google’s/Youtube’s response is that is was nothing less than an open admission that Youtube is a willing and complicit participant in a conspiracy to cover-up very serious crimes against humanity.
As we’ve seen with Hunter Biden’s laptop, government actors such as Congressman Adam Schiff immediately jumped out in front of the story by floating the unsubstantiated theory that it’s all a “Russian disinformation campaign”. His fellow criminal operatives in the intelligence community pile-on by publicly proclaiming that “all indications are that it is Russian disinformation”.
Their coup-plotting co-conspirators in the main stream media immediately broadcast Schiff and intelligence official’s lies on network television and cable news, and social media companies activate their mass censorship technology to stop any truthful information from spreading like wildfire. It has been confirmed by the Department of Justice that information on Hunter Biden’s laptop is being investigated for potential money laundering and other possible crimes.
Let that sink in. Elected officials, main stream media reporters, and big tech companies have all been working in concert to cover up information about an investigation and alleged crimes perpetrated against the United States of America. In legal terminology, they call that a “conspiracy”. In Big Tech terminology, censorship is justified all under the guise of protecting the community from “dangerous conspiracy theories linked to real-world violence”.
Google/Youtube’s most recent legal filing is significant, as it reveals details of a very complex decision making process in their participation as a co-conspirator to suppress evidence of crimes being perpetrated upon the American people.
The Plaintiffs are not a small group of “gamers” who are playing violent computer games whose conduct on Youtube could inspire mass murderers to act out their computer war simulations. These Youtubers are researchers whose entire body of work connects the dots with evidence of potential crimes against humanity. As we are all very well aware, some of the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity reside in the halls of Silicon Valley corporations such as Facebook, Youtube and Twitter. This not a conspiracy theory that can easily be dismissed by deleting Youtube videos.
In the past several years, we’ve discovered indisputable facts through trials and legal proceedings (i.e. Epstein, NXVIUM, Spygate, RussiaGate, Ukraine Gate, etc, etc, etc.) that politicians, corporate executives, and corrupt law enforcement officials have been involved in crimes such as treason & sedition against the United States government, money laundering, sex trafficking, child exploitation, drug trafficking, and human rights abuses. Independent researchers such as the Plaintiffs have been informing the public of their findings, and Google/Youtube has now admitted to stopping them on a massive scale.
Over the past 10 years I’ve relied upon many independent researchers such as SGT Report, Amazing Polly, Jordan Sather, etc. to supplement my own independent research and investigations, and over the past 10 years I’ve personally witnessed and experienced Youtube’s very sophisticated means of suppressing information which has exposed criminal conspiracies which have resulted in mass death and physical/economic destruction around the world. In every instance, Google/Youtube has justified censorship of my criminal investigations under the guise of “protecting the community”, or stopping the spread of “hate speech” that could inspire extremists to act.
Just to give you an idea of the work I’ve performed as an independent investigator, please allow me to name just a couple stories that Google/Youtube has wiped off the internet for the purposes of “protecting the community”.(We’ve had over 150,000 channel subscribers & 60 million+ viewers deleted) :
UKRAINE – In 2012-2014, our team cataloged evidence of a CIA overthrow of the Ukraine government, mercenary snipers firing at both police and protestors in Kiev, as well money laundering and corruption that we are still learning about to this day.
9-11 – Since 2012, we’ve interviewed scientists and federal law enforcement who’ve exposed a massive criminal cover-up of the attack on the US on 9-11. Additionally, we broadcast documentation from FOIA requests detailing the FBI’s evacuation of the Bin Laden family on 9-11, along with several individuals who were on the terror watch list.
BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING: On the night that the Boston Marathon Bombing suspects were pursued by law enforcement, during a live broadcast of events, we recorded live radio transmissions of police identifying the fugitives as “Mike Mulageta and Sunil Trupathi”. Officers transmitted the information to their dispatch operators, reading directly from the driver’s licenses of the subjects. 2 hours later, the Associated Press announced that the fugitives were identified as the “Zarnaev brothers”; (associated with Chechnian Rebels).
BUNDY RANCH (2014) / MALHEUR NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE PROTEST (2016) – In a multi-year investigation of corrupt law enforcement officials within the Department of Interior / Bureau of Land Management who, by the way, have all been removed from their federal law enforcement duties/jobs, I was involved in defeating the Obama Administration’s Department of Justice prosecutors in 2 federal trials in Oregon and Nevada. U.S. Attorneys and FBI officials were found by Federal Judges to have committed prosecutorial misconduct and suppression fo exculpatory evidence. In 2020, a liberal 9th Circuit panel deemed the indictment of the defendants to be a complete fraud.
These are merely four of some of the most important stories of our lifetime that I’ve covered. Over the past 10 years, I have not only personally witnessed Google/Youtube suppress information, but in the 2 federal cases we won in Oregon and Nevada, we learned in open court that Big Tech corporations such as Google/Youtube, Facebook and Twitter are acting in concert with corrupt & criminal operators within the federal government. Essentially, I have legal documentation that they’re acting at the behest of corrupt government officials in order to cover-up evidence of their crimes.
The “community” they purport to be protecting is literally intentionally being harmed by Google/Youtube’s censorship. For instance, in January 2016 I reported that the Clinton Foundation had received $140 million from Russian individuals from Uranium One. I was the second journalist to report on Hillary Clinton’s connection to Uranium One. Of course the FBI, main stream media and Youtube all called me a “conspiracy theorist”, and all of my listeners “extremists”, “white nationalists” and was officially designated by the Obama Administration as an anti-government domestic terrorist. Youtube deleted my entire channel for “bullying” & “hate speech”, and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch signed off on my arrest warrant after the FBI manufactured a fake 302 report.
As a corporation, does Youtube have the right to remove content at their discretion? Sure, but do they have the right to blatantly conceal their direct involvement as a co-conspirator and government actor covering up independent criminal investigations?
If they were running a privately owned restaurant, do they have the right to post a sign telling their customers they can refuse service to anyone without a shirt or shoes — yes — but is the restaurant immune from accountability for assassinating customers who discover the FBI/CIA is running a casino in the back room, or the ATF is dealing illegal drugs over the counter, or better yet, politicians are using the restaurant as a store front to conceal a sex-trafficking operation —- all under the guise of “protecting their customers”?
If you decide to read Google/Youtube’s OPPOSITION filing, ask yourself the following:
They cite the FBI as a source of information on domestic terrorism and extremism inspired by the QAnon or Pizzagate community. Do you trust the integrity of the FBI, the corrupt Deep State agency lead by Christopher Wray which (a) called for the deletion of the Weiner laptop and secretly held onto the Hunter Biden laptop since 2018?
Youtube references news articles as sources of information of extremism and hate groups. Do you trust left wing main stream media designations of hate groups, extremists or conspiracy theorists?
Do you trust that Google/Youtube is deleting Youtube channels to “protect the community”, or do you believe they’re operating in concert with, and at the behest of corrupt, Deep State government actors who are being exposed by trusted independent investigators such as SGT Report, Amazing Polly, etc.?
Even if you believe that businesses have a right to operate their businesses as they see fit, does that mean they have a right to assist in covering up crimes?
If independent investigators who publish their work on Youtube can be shut down because they’re covering stories that inspire extremists to act violently, shouldn’t the rules apply equally to Black Lives Matters “mostly peaceful protestors” who inspire others to loot, burn down buildings and kill police officers?
October 15th will be an important date to remember. This was the day that Google/Youtube made the fatal error of officially putting their name on the list of Deep State criminal conspirators who are perpetrating crimes against humanity.
The Plaintiffs in this lawsuit are Patriots. They’re investigators with Godly intentions. They’re people who are doing their best to expose crimes being perpetrated upon humanity. Google/Youtube is not only intentionally trying to stop them from exposing crimes, they’re acting as criminal co-conspirators of the Deep State.
Who is more protective of the “community”, the Plaintiffs (Youtubers) or the Defendants (Google/YouTube)? Regardless of who wins the lawsuit, this case will certainly be tried in the court of public opinion.
Emergency Filing Alleges That Youtube Acted At The Behest & Encouragement Of The U.S. House Of Representatives. (To Deplatform Content Producers)
Fifteen popular YouTube content creators filed a federal lawsuit today against Google and YouTube, alleging that Google and YouTube have breached the Terms of Service those creators had agreed to when they signed on and violated their First Amendment rights. What started as rumor of a ‘coming widespread purge” of conservative content producers right before midterm elections in 2018, quickly turned into reality as just weeks before votes were to be cast FaceBook disabled 559 pages and 251 accounts. YouTube and Twitter were matching FaceBook’s censorship during that time with the beginning of what we have seen come to pass in the last few weeks.
According to the press release the Plaintiffs are these popular creators of YouTube channels, with collectively lay claim to over 800 million views: JustInformed Talk, SGT Report, X22 Report, SpaceShot 76, TruReporting, RedPill78, Edge of Wonder, Praying Medic, Amazing Polly, Woke Societies, Daniel Lee, Deception Byes, InTheMatrixxx, Destroying the Illusion, and Sarah Westall.
The Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys M. Cris Armenta and Credence Sol. Both are former federal law clerks; Ms. Armenta in the Central District of California, and Ms. Sol in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ms. Armenta has been named one of the top 100 female attorneys in California and is on the peer‐reviewed SuperLawyers list for civil litigation who fully expect YouTube and Google defend the case and claim that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides them immunity for the actions taken against conservative YouTube commentators and content creators.
The lawsuit also alleges that YouTube acted at the behest, was encouraged by and coerced by Congress, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and Representative Adam Schiff who published a complaint on Congressional letterhead that urged content be removed and replaced. The press release goes further to explain: The Plaintiffs allege that under Supreme Court precedent, if a private party acts when it is encouraged or coerced by the government or its agents, then the state action theory applies and the First Amendment rights should be protected, particularly from viewpoint discrimination. Since Adam Schiff, a sitting representative, personally and publicly in his official capacity asked for social media platforms to begin censoring conservative content providers and YouTube thereafter responded and complied to that request, the door was opened for this lawsuit.
The Plaintiffs expect that they will either receive or be denied an emergency injunction, or a restraining order upon Youtube, requiring that their accounts be reinstated. If the lawsuit proceeds as expected, it is anticipated that the legal issues raised in the complaint may finally settle the issues relating to Big Tech’s immunity from lawsuits under the protection of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
The implications are immense, and the public deserves to be well informed on the progress of this landmark case.
We will continue to provide updates as litigation proceeds.
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA – On October 26, 2020, fifteen YouTube content creators filed a federal
lawsuit against Google and YouTube, alleging in seventeen claims for relief, that Google and YouTube
breached the Terms of Service and violated their First Amendment rights, when they summarily deplatformed
the Plaintiffs’ channels and removed their content from YouTube without advance notice.
The Plaintiffs are the creators of YouTube channels, including: JustInformed Talk, SGT Report,
X22 Report, SpaceShot 76, TruReporting, RedPill78, Edge of Wonder, Praying Medic, Amazing Polly,
Woke Societies, Daniel Lee, Deception Byes, InTheMatrixxx, Destroying the Illusion and Sarah Westall.
Together, their news and social commentary channels have reached more than 800 million views and
together they had more YouTube subscribers than many legacy news channels, such as C‐SPAN, The
New York Times, and NBC News. Plaintiffs cite a recent study by the Pew Research Center that concludes
that many Americans get their news from independent YouTube channels along the same metrics as
legacy or traditional news sources.
YouTube and Google are expected to defend the case and claim that Section 230 of the
Communications Decency Act provides them immunity for the actions they took against conservative
commentators, just 19 days before the November 3 Presidential Election. However, the Ninth Circuit
has recently issued an opinion, retreating from the broad interpretation of the immunity that social
media has used for years to defend lawsuits from its contract partners and users. The Section 230
immunities were provided by Congress as a means to give internet providers an ability to remove
content that was considered “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or
otherwise objectionable.” Enigma Software Group USA LLC. V. Malwarebytes, Inc., No. 17‐17351
(Opinion filed September 12, 2019). The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found persuasive the notion
that the “unbounded reading” of Section 230 previously employed by social media giants such as
YouTube would allow a content provider to “block content for anticompetitive purposes or merely at its
malicious whim.”
The Plaintiffs allege that YouTube removed their channels without giving them notice or without
cause under the Terms of Service that YouTube itself drafted and imposed on the Plaintiffs. The
Plaintiffs allege that YouTube also violated the First Amendment rights of the Plaintiffs, and the public
they serve through their social commentary, news and information channels. Although many courts
have rejected the notion that YouTube is subject to the First Amendment, concluding that YouTube is a
private party, the Complaint alleges that YouTube acted at the behest, was encouraged by and coerced
by Congress, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Representative Adam Schiff. The Plaintiffs attach
to the Complaint letters that Representative Schiff published on Congressional letterhead that urged
that content be removed and replaced. The Plaintiffs also reference the House’s recent action by the
House, in passing House Resolution 1154, which condemned certain content and specifically mentioned
social media. In direct response to Representative Schiff’s published letter demanding censorship,
YouTube Chief Executive Officer Susan Wojcicki responded by Tweet: “Thanks for reaching out, we’re
working every day to protect people from misinformation and help them find authoritative information.
We appreciate your partnership and will continue to consult with Members of Congress as we address
ARMENTA & SOL PC, 114400 WEST BERNARDO COURT, SUITE 300, SAN DIEGO, CA 92127
the evolving issues around #COVID19.” The Plaintiffs allege that under Supreme Court precedent, if a
private party acts when it is encouraged or coerced by the government or its agents, then the state
action theory applies and the First Amendment rights should be protected, particularly from viewpoint
discrimination.
This lawsuit follows the filing of a massive antitrust action against Google by the Department of
Justice and eleven states.
The “state action” theory was previously raised in by Armenta & Sol, on behalf of an African‐
American conservative commentator, Young Pharaoh, in July 2020 also against Google and YouTube.
Although the Defendants in that case filed a Motion to Dismiss and oral argument was held, Magistrate
Judge Virginia DeMarchi has not yet issued a decision.
The lawsuit will be served on Google and YouTube today.
* * *
The Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys M. Cris Armenta and Credence Sol. Both were
previously affiliated with Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP. Both are former federal law clerks;
Ms. Armenta in the Central District of California, and Ms. Sol in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ms.
Armenta has been named one of the top 100 female attorneys in California and is on the peer‐reviewed
SuperLawyers list for civil litigation. Ms. Armenta is a former member of the Board of Directors of the
American Civil Liberties Union in Los Angeles. Ms. Armenta’s law practice focuses on civil litigation,
entertainment, real estate, and the recovery of abducted children. Ms. Sol’s practice focuses on civil
litigation and intellectual property, in which she has a Ph.D; she has published several articles on
Internet law and international freedom of speech issues. Both Ms. Armenta and Ms. Sol have previously
litigated against Google.
Hi, my name is Zach Vorhies and I’m known as the Google Whistleblower. I’m working with Ryan Hartwig, Facebook Whistleblower on this campaign.
I worked at Google for 8.5 years as a senior software engineer. The last three years of which was spent at Google-owned YouTube.
With much regret, my former employer YouTube has now become a direct threat to the United States of America and the Republic for which it stands. YouTube is engaging in reckless censorship by doing a mass purge of content creators it deems “brand unsafe.”
Why would Google take actions that seemingly squash the clear exchange of ideas and differing points of view? Doesn’t that seem to interfere with free speech? The election? In fact, this is EXACTLY the case. Google is deliberately attempting to influence the election by preventing certain opinions from being shared.
Here are just a few of the Youtube channels that were deleted last week by Google/Youtube:
This behavior is nothing short of an election coup!
People may think that the phrase “election coup” is too strong, maybe even hyperbole. Google wouldn’t ACTUALLY want to do a coup… would they?
As someone who saw the inside of Google, my answer to this is: “Yes, without ANY doubt”.
I know because I saw it with my own eyes. It took me several years of watching Google build this election-rigging machine before I came to the conclusion that Google would certainly try to steal the 2020 election. This was not something they tried to hide. Instead, they carefully documented as a huge project named “Machine Learning Fairness” – which I downloaded and disclosed to the public in August of 2019. The disclosure is 950 pages and can be seen here.
Don’t just take my word for it, Jen Gennai, a current high level Google director, admitted last year to an undercover journalist that only something the size of Google could “prevent the next Trump situation”.
As a former employee, I understand the scale of Google. I am terrified about what could happen to me for fighting the biggest election rigging machine the world has ever known.
What is one small individual like myself compared to this GIANT? If I were Google I would have this company whistleblower killed. Does this sound outlandish? Here is what Google did to me when I sent that 950 pages to the DOJ in August of 2019:
What you see here is a wellness check that included the San Francisco Police department, the FBI and the Bomb squad. I wish I was making this up but it actually happened.
This is a David VS Goliath moment
The only thing that terrifies me more than dying and my family being targeted is the world that Google is building for all of us. This is really our last stand. This is more than a coup on the US election, if Google wins it will be a coup on humanity. Why? Because Google see’s YOU as a programmable unit; programmable via its control of the information they return to you when you use Google search, Google news and YouTube. For example, this Google slide details how the company manipulates you.
This intention to program YOU (the American Public) is also found in other documents from the company:
This is not a “Left vs Right” or “Conservative vs Liberal” issue
This fight has nothing to do with politics. It is a fight for the future of humanity. I do this not just for you, but also for your children, your children’s children and for generations to come. They deserve the free world that we inherited. The torch of freedom must be passed on.
This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to stand together and fight against Google. As a single person I mean nothing. It has always been YOU, the American people that has made this fight possible. Together Google CAN and WILL be stopped!
Stand with me and FIGHT NOW! I am putting $5k of my own money into this to say “no more”. Others have done the same. Stand with us with a donation of $5, $10 or $15 dollars which together will fund this emergency injunction.
Amplify, share and like this story as much as Big Tech will allow. Time is of the essence. We are being censored. Go NOW to all social media platforms and SHARE punchgoogle.com. Share it with your friends, your family and your co-workers.
Regardless of your political affiliation, together we can TOPPLE Google and restore freedom of speech to our land. Pledge now. And make sure you tell your friends about this campaign found at punchgoogle DOT com (which will redirect to this gofundme).
Thank you,
~Zach
About the Attorney Cris Armenta
I want to mention that I (Zach Vorhies) did an extensive vetting of many attorneys across the country. Cris Armenta was the one with the strongest knowledge about how to defeat Google.
The necessary criteria for selection includes:
1. The attorney practices in California.
2. The attorney has specific knowledge and strategy on how to attack YouTube/Google.
3. The attorney are prepared to file the suit immediately.
It turns out the Google/YouTube terms of service requires that the person sue Google in California. Although the venue could possibly be challenged in court, doing so adds additional risk.
What sealed the deal beyond the conversation about legal strategy was also the coincidence that Cris Armenta was also selected by my friend and YouTube content creator “Young Pharaoh” (500k subs on YouTube) to represent him in his case against YouTube. Cris Armenta’s case history against Google means she has a well thought out strategy. After going in depth and playing a bunch of angles with Cris Armenta during the vetting process it was clear why “Young Pharaoh” chose Cris Armenta to represent him.
LEGAL STRATEGY
This is essentially a breach of contract lawsuit against Google.
Here’s the brief summary of our strategy:
1. Case to be filed by the top conservative accounts that were purged on October 15, 2020.
2. Google/YouTube violated its own Terms of Service by shutting down the accounts because they can only do so when 3 conditions existed by their own TOS.
3. They claim they were shut down for repeated violations and harassment.
4. But, the channels were not repeaters nor did they harass, and the new harassment policy was enacted in a way to complete decimate these channels specifically.
5. The Plaintiffs will be seeking a TRO or emergency injunction to put the channels back up.
6. The Plaintiffs have a First Amendment right to speak, large reach, and there is “state action” in so far as Representative Schiff demanded that “conspiracy” channels come down and HR 1154 condemned the type of speech up on these channels.
7. This is a First Amendment case, but it will be simplified by holding YouTube accountable to the very TOS it itself imposed.
8. The attorneys involved have extensive experience in litigating with Google and are shaping up the case to either win at the Ninth Circuit (President flipped the circuit) or to create clear path for the amendment of Section 230.
9. Last week, SCOTUS declined to hear the case where the Ninth Circuit said that 230 immunity is NOT “boundless.”
10. We have a good chance of success and paring back the Section 230 immunity and getting the conservative pro-Trump content back up before the election, just in time, if we are funded adequately.
An in-depth discussion about the legal strategy can be viewed in the following video (around 45 minutes).
Q&A
Q: When will the injunction be filed?
A: Assuming this crowdfunding reaches the funding goal, the injunction will be filed by the end of the week. Around the 26th or sooner.
Q: Can I be a party to the suit?
A: Yes, we have an open call for those that have been wrongly terminated by YouTube for political reasons. If this sounds like you, please fill out this form.
A: Yes! We allow a tax-deductible charitable donation, just follow this link.
Q: Who is Ryan Hartwig and why is he connected to this campaign?
A: Ryan Hartwig is a Facebook whistleblower that I have been working with for a number of months. Ryan has an Arizona non-profit. All funds will be donated to legal fees and costs.
Legal Disclaimer
The donations will be used to fund a lawsuit against Google, YouTube and Alphabet directed to speech that is protected by the First Amendment and that was purged from YouTube through demonetizations, terminations or suspensions in violation of the YouTube Terms of Service. The donations will be used to fund attorneys’ fees and costs on behalf of the named Plaintiffs in the lawsuit, and any Plaintiffs thereafter added. All donations of any amount are welcome, but only funds from U.S. citizens and permanent residents will be accepted. All donated funds will be used solely to defray attorneys’ fees and other costs related to this legal representation. By donating, the donors agree that they understand that they have no authority to direct the representation or have access to confidential client or privileged communications. Any unused funds at the conclusion of the representation will be returned to The Hartwig Foundation for Free Speech.
This morning I received the following document in a Telegram news/chat thread (H/T Ashley S.) which was submitted on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein’s victim, Virginia Giuffre:
Here’s what we know: “BSF – Bois Schiller Flexner” was founded by Heather King, and according to connecting websites King is still active in the firm. Who is Heather King & why does it matter? It matters because, it was discovered in the confidential emails contained on Hunter Biden’s laptop that Heather King was representing Biden’s interest in Burisma :
It is important to understand who Heather King is because when you take a closer look at her ties to Hunter Biden you quickly learn she is deeply connected to the Clinton Crime Family. Now on the face of it you might say that isn’t so surprising given that the Clinton’s and the Biden’s have a long history of connectivity as almost every liberal politician in Washington, DC does, but there is a surprising connection that suggests there is a very murky relationship between the Clintons, the Bidens, Jeffrey Epstein, Epstein’s most publicly known victim, and Heather King & BSF.
Heather King of BSF, we learn much about her professional experience and connections to the Clintons through her own Linked-In page:
It is also important to note her “Human Rights” advocacy on behalf of exploited “girls worldwide”, as well as her direct connection to the Clinton Foundation. Given that she is a representing attorney to the now questionable Hunter Biden, who’s sex tapes are being reported to show the middle-aged son of Joe Biden having sex with underage girls, and the accusations that the Clintons were deeply involved in the Jeffrey Epstein exploitation of young girls, we find it interesting that Heather King is also heading up some pretty serious recruiting efforts to bring young girls into DC politics under the guise and promise to protect them from the exact type of men (sexual-predator politicians) she vigorously represents.
Deep State government bureaucrats, media & silicon valley censors would immediately call this “conspiracy theory” for thinking or discussing these connections, dismissing them as coincidental, unrelated or speculative, but when you understand that the firm Heather King founded, is a partner, and is still deeply rooted in is also representing and advising Virginia Roberts-Giuffre who just happens to be the number-one accuser of Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein, and Ghislaine Maxwell, it becomes abundantly clear that Heather King is much more than just another attorney who represents Hunter Biden and his interest in Burisma.
HERE ARE SOME FACTS:
The Laptop From Hell reportedly contains damning information related to the Biden Family’s alleged corruption and money laundering in the Ukraine through Burisma.
Hunter Biden is reportedly a child/sex abuser, and the Laptop From Hell has been turned over to Delaware State & Federal law enforcement by Former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Former NYPD Police Chief Bernard Kerik.
All of the legal, financial and allegedly criminal information contained on the laptop is almost certainly in the possession of Chinese Communist Party intelligence officials.
Heather King of BSF, a purported advocate for the prevention of exploitation of women is representing Hunter Biden, an alleged child/sex abuser who is currently under investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigations.
Heather King and her BSF law firm is centrally connected to Hillary Clinton, The Clinton Foundation, Hunter Biden, Burisma and their top client Arcelor-Mital; owned by Victor Punchuk; the Clinton Foundation’s top donor, as well as Virginia Roberts-Giuffre in the Jeffrey Epstein / Ghislaine Maxwell case.
Coincidence? For those of us who have spent a decade connecting the people in the Clinton circle of abuse, there are no coincidences. We can only wonder if Virginia Roberts-Giuffre was informed by her BSF attorneys that they’ve been working for the Clintons in various capacities since 1999 .. If not, then why? And if she does know, then the question that begs to be answered is; just exactly who is Virginia “Roberts” Giuffre?
(Programming note: Please tune in to the live broadcast of The Pete Santilli Show for analysis of this explosive report tonight, Sunday October 25, 2020 at 6pm EST Visit: PeteSantilli.mobi for links on how you can watch the show on the Range Broadcasting Network.)
Read all the emails that have been made public by Rudy Giuliani here:
Although there is clear and convincing evidence, authorities are yet to indict and arrest anyone connected to the scheme. In fact, an anonymous source revealed that the investigation has already produced three top leaders allegedly running the same exact operation exposed in the Project Veritas report on a national scale.
Marc Alias, Neal Katyal and Norm Eisen are the individuals who have allegedly masterminded one of the largest voter fraud scams in American history. Despite overwhelming evidence and eyewitness accounts , FBI Director Wray has recently denied the existence of a “National Voter Fraud Effort“. Sources also indicate that Alias, Katyal and Eisen have developed an elaborate communications network via online gaming chat threads to avoid detection by NSA surveillance.
For years, the intelligence community has utilized online gaming chat rooms to communicate off-the-books operational instructions between intel agents as well as with their sources and co-conspirators. White hat whistleblowers have recently disclosed sample chat logs as a means of directing compartmentalized FBI investigators, but as usual, 7th Floor leadership has quashed numerous investigations. Several sources have alleged that Alias, Katyal and Eisen are the top generals leading an unprecedented national voter fraud scheme, and their coup network is communicating specific instructions to operational subordinates.
Sample Covert Communications Via Online Gaming Channels:
To understand the significance of this sourced information, we have to take a closer look at these three top voter fraud generals.
NORM EISEN
A detailed look at Norm Eisen’s shady background reveals he’s one of the most overt CIA operatives in the history of the Central Intelligence Agency. Eisen doesn’t even conceal his ‘spooky’ traits. Eisen is reportedly one of the key architects of the “Transition Integrity Project’s” coup manual titled Preventing A Disrupted Presidential Election Transition.
REVOLVER.COM: The man who implemented the David Brock blueprint for suing the President into paralysis and his allies into bankruptcy, who helped mainstream and amplify the Russia Hoax, who drafted 10 articles of impeachment for the Democrats a full month before President Trump ever called the Ukraine President in 2018, who personally served as special counsel litigating the Ukraine impeachment, who created a template for Internet censorship of world leaders and a handbook for mass mobilizing racial justice protesters to overturn democratic election results, there is perhaps no man alive with a more decorated resume for plots against President Trump.
Indeed, the story of Norm Eisen – a key architect of nearly every attempt to delegitimize, impeach, censor, sue and remove the democratically elected 45th President of the United States – is a tale that winds through nearly every facet of the color revolution playbook. There is no purer embodiment of Revolver’s thesis that the very same regime change professionals who run Color Revolutions on behalf of the US Government in order to undermine or overthrow alleged “authoritarian” governments overseas, are running the very same playbook to overturn Trump’s 2016 victory and to pre-empt a repeat in 2020. To put it simply, what you see is not just the same Color Revolution playbook run against Trump, but the same people using it against Trump who have employed it in a professional capacity against targets overseas—same people same playbook.
In Norm Eisen’s case, the “same people same playbook” refrain takes an arrestingly literal turn when one realizes that Norm Eisen wrote a classic Color Revolution regime change manual, and conveniently titled it “The Playbook.”
Just what exactly is President Obama’s former White House Ethics Czar (yes, Norm Eisen was Obama’s ethics Czar), his longtime friend since Harvard Law School, who recently partook in war games to simulate overturning a Trump electoral victory, doing writing a detailed playbook on how to use a Color Revolution to overthrow governments? The story of Norm Eisen only gets more fascinating, outrageous, and indispensable to understanding the planned chaos unfolding before our eyes, leading up to what will perhaps be the most chaotic election in our nation’s recent history.
Eisen is also a Senior Fellow of the Brookings institute, an organization with surprising ties to Chins’a Huawei Corporation. Outside of Brookings, Eisen is providing informal assistance exclusively to the Biden campaign for president.
MARC ELIAS
Senior Partner, Perkins Coie , the firm that paid Fusion GPS on behalf of Clinton’s campaign and the DNC to produce the infamous Christopher Steele dossier that reportedly served as part of the roadmap for the FBI to investigate ultimately disproven Russia collusion charges. The same dossier, which contained wild and unsubstantiated charges, was cited as purported evidence in four successful FISA court applications to conduct surveillance on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
POLITICO: Biden’s campaign is assembling a voter protection staff with a far larger footprint than Clinton’s equivalent in 2016. In addition to a national voter hotline, it has set up 15 state-specific ones. It has a large team of lawyers, including two former solicitors general, Donald Verrilli and Walter Dellinger, and a group headed by Marc Elias, a prominent election law attorney, focusing on voter access and ballot counting in the states. The campaign says it will spend at least $100 million on voter-education efforts alone.
The New York Times reported in 2015 on a Soros-funded legal campaign, led by Mark Elias — former general counsel for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign — to change voter ID laws in Ohio and Wisconsin. Elias has also led legal challenges to other voting laws, including certain timeframes on early voting.
FEC records as well as federal court records show that Marc Elias, the Perkins Coie lawyer whom the Washington Post reported was responsible for the payments to Fusion GPS on behalf of Clinton’s campaign and the DNC, also previously served as a counsel for Obama For America. In Shamblin v. Obama for America, a 2013 case in federal court in Florida, federal court records list Elias as simultaneously serving as lead attorney for both OFA and the DNC.
HEAVY: According to his law firm bio, Elias has also played a role in election integrity issues. On Twitter, Elias describes himself as “a lawyer fighting to elect Democrats up and down the ballot, and protecting voting rights for all.” He has been involved in elections-related lawsuits, such as one intervening in a Nevada state recall.
“Following the 2014 elections, Marc was appointed by DNC Chair Wasserman Schultz as a member of the Victory Task Force to review key components of the role of the Democratic Party–and related organizations—in recent elections and identify places where the party can strengthen and improve operations in future elections,” the bio recounts. “Marc served as lead counsel for Senator Al Franken in the 2008 Minnesota Senate election recount and contest—the largest recount and contest in American history. He successfully argued the case before the Minnesota State Supreme Court, which resulted in a unanimous decision affirming that Franken had received the highest number of votes legally cast in the 2008 general election for U.S. Senator.”
Marc represented Senator Maria Cantwell in connection with her 2000 recount, Senator Harry Reid in connection with his 1998 recount, and served as a consultant to the Senate Rules Committee during its consideration of the 1996 Louisiana Senate election contest,” the bio says, adding, “Marc has represented numerous clients in public corruption and campaign finance matters before the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Offices and Offices of Independent Counsel. He has also represented clients before committees of both the House and Senate, as well as before federal agencies.”
NEAL KATYAL
Wikipedia: During the Obama Administration, Katyal served as Acting Solicitor General of the United States from May 2010[4] until June 2011. Previously, Katyal served as an attorney in the Solicitor General’s office, and as Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the U.S. Justice Department. While teaching at Georgetown University Law Center for two decades,[3] Katyal was lead counsel for the Guantanamo Bay detainees in the Supreme Court case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), which held that Guantanamo military commissions set up by the George W. Bush administration to try detainees “violate both the UCMJ and the four Geneva Conventions.”[21]
Katyal is one of the most vocal advocates of the latest Coup plots to remove President Trump under the 25th Amendment schemes:
If the allegations connecting Norm Eisen, Marc Elias and Neal Katyal to the massive nationwide voter fraud scheme are true, what is FBI Director Christopher Wray doing to stop them? At minimum, this matter deserves an in depth investigation, as there are plenty of sources blowing the whistle on their ongoing coup plot, especially after Project Veritas’s latest releases.
Today the Justice Department requested COVID-19 data from the governors of states that issued orders which may have resulted in the deaths of thousands of elderly nursing home residents. New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Michigan required nursing homes to admit COVID-19 patients to their vulnerable populations, often without adequate testing.
For example, on March 25, 2020, New York ordered: “No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to [a nursing home] solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19. [Nursing homes] are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for COVID-19 prior to admission or readmission.”
“Protecting the rights of some of society’s most vulnerable members, including elderly nursing home residents, is one of our country’s most important obligations,” said Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Division Eric Dreiband. “We must ensure they are adequately cared for with dignity and respect and not unnecessarily put at risk.”
According to the Centers for Disease Control, New York has the highest number of COVID-19 deaths in the United States, with 32,592 victims, many of them elderly. New York’s death rate by population is the second highest in the country with 1,680 deaths per million people. New Jersey’s death rate by population is 1,733 deaths per million people – the highest in the nation. In contrast, Texas’s death rate by population is 380 deaths per million people; and Texas has just over 11,000 deaths, though its population is 50 percent larger than New York and has many more recorded cases of COVID-19 – 577,537 cases in Texas versus 430,885 cases in New York. Florida’s COVID-19 death rate is 480 deaths per million; with total deaths of 10,325 and a population slightly larger than New York.
The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division is evaluating whether to initiate investigations under the federal “Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act” (CRIPA), which protects the civil rights of persons in state-run nursing homes, among others. The Civil Rights Division seeks to determine if the state orders requiring admission of COVID-19 patients to nursing homes is responsible for the deaths of nursing home residents.
On March 3, 2020, the Attorney General announced the Justice Department’s National Nursing Home Initiative. This is a comprehensive effort by the department, led by the Elder Justice Initiative and in strong partnership with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that uses every available tool to pursue nursing homes that provide substandard care to their residents. As announced on April 10, 2020, the department is also investigating the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke, Massachusetts, where COVID-19 has taken the lives of at least 76 residents. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-investigation-conditions-nursing-home-veterans-massachusetts-announced
Letters were sent to Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York State, Governor Phil Murphy of New Jersey, Governor Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania, and Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan from the Department of Justice requesting answers. DOJ states “Data will help inform whether the Department of Justice will initiate investigations under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) regarding New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Michigan’s response to COVID-19 in public nursing homes”
Mainstream media failed to ask the questions most Americans have been asking for months. Why would these governors place known COVID-19 infected individuals in nursing homes endangering the lives of the elderly? It is widely known the elderly are more likely to catch and die from COVID-19 than any other group. Was this an ‘oversight’? Was this neglect? Was this intentional? The American people deserve answers, and so do the many families that have been effected and lost loved ones by these actions. Maybe soon we will get those answers.
“Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers and U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota Erica H. MacDonald today announced the guilty plea of Tnuza Jamal Hassan, 22, to attempting to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization (al-Qa’ida). Hassan entered her guilty plea this morning before Judge Patrick J. Schiltz in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
According to the defendant’s guilty plea and documents filed in court, in March of 2017, while a freshman student at St. Catherine University (SCU) in St. Paul, Minnesota, Hassan drafted a letter encouraging others to join a designated foreign terrorist organization, namely, al-Qa’ida (AQ), and anonymously delivered the letter to two other students at SCU for the purpose of recruiting those individuals to join AQ. During a subsequent interview with FBI agents, Hassan denied authoring or delivering the recruitment letter.
According to the defendant’s guilty plea and documents filed in court, on Sept. 18, 2017, Hassan purchased a round-trip airline ticket from Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP) to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and purchased a second round-trip ticket from Dubai to Kabul, Afghanistan. Hassan later admitted that she planned to travel from Dubai to Kabul where she hoped to join AQ and that she had no intentions of returning to the United States. On Sept. 19, 2017, Hassan boarded a flight and traveled from MSP to Dubai, but was prevented from traveling to Kabul because she failed to secure a travel visa allowing her to enter the country.
According to the defendant’s guilty plea and documents filed in court, on Jan. 17, 2018, Hassan, who at that time was living in a SCU dorm lounge without the university’s permission, attempted to set several fires on the SCU campus. Hassan admitted that she attempted to burn SCU buildings as a retaliatory act against the United States for its opposition to AQ in Afghanistan.
Hassan has been charged in Ramsey County District Court with one count of first-degree arson.
This case is the result of an investigation conducted by the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force, St. Paul Police Department, and arson investigators from the St. Paul Fire Department.
This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew R. Winter.”
A local CBS news agency reported on the incident in January 2019.
The fires were small and quickly contained. Nobody was injured and damage was limited to furnishings, the school said in a statement. A sprinkler system prevented the dormitory fire from spreading beyond a chair to the day care center, where 33 children and eight adults were present.
“Hassan said she wanted the school to burn to the ground and that her intent was to hurt people,” the complaint said. “Hassan said this was that same thing that happened in ‘Muslim land’ and nobody cares if they get hurt, so why not do this?”
Hassan, of Minneapolis, was an English major who last enrolled in the fall 2017 semester but is not currently enrolled, the school said. The complaint said she withdrew because she and her family were planning to vacation in Ethiopia.
The complaint also said she wrote a letter to her roommates containing “radical ideas about supporting Muslims and bringing back the caliphate.” It said the letter scared the roommates, who turned the letter over to campus security.
“She told the police and fire investigators ‘You guys are lucky that I don’t know how to build a bomb because I would have done that,’” the complaint said.
President J. Trump signed an Executive Order to help protect Americans jobs on August 3, 2020. Americans have lost their jobs to foreign H1B visa holders, or by companies outsourcing jobs overseas looking for cheaper labor for years. The President is taking a firm stand and saying no more! With so many Americans having been forced into joblessness due to the COVID19 lockdowns, a ray of hope still shines through the darkness. This change in federal contracting and hiring practices is a welcome, much needed, and positive change.
Section1. Policy. It is the policy of the executive branch to create opportunities for United States workers to compete for jobs, including jobs created through Federal contracts. These opportunities, particularly in regions where the Federal Government remains the largest employer, are especially critical during the economic dislocation caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. When employers trade American jobs for temporary foreign labor, for example, it reduces opportunities for United States workers in a manner inconsistent with the role guest-worker programs are meant to play in the Nation’s economy.
Sec. 2. Review of Contracting and Hiring Practices. (a) The head of each executive department and agency (agency) that enters into contracts shall review, to the extent practicable, performance of contracts (including subcontracts) awarded by the agency in fiscal years 2018 and 2019 to assess:
(i) whether contractors (including subcontractors) used temporary foreign labor for contracts performed in the United States, and, if so, the nature of the work performed by temporary foreign labor on such contracts; whether opportunities for United States workers were affected by such hiring; and any potential effects on the national security caused by such hiring; and
(ii) whether contractors (including subcontractors) performed in foreign countries services previously performed in the United States, and, if so, whether opportunities for United States workers were affected by such offshoring; whether affected United States workers were eligible for assistance under the Trade Adjustment Assistance program authorized by the Trade Act of 1974; and any potential effects on the national security caused by such offshoring.
(b) The head of each agency that enters into contracts shall assess any negative impact of contractors’ and subcontractors’ temporary foreign labor hiring practices or offshoring practices on the economy and efficiency of Federal procurement and on the national security, and propose action, if necessary and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to improve the economy and efficiency of Federal procurement and protect the national security.
(c) The head of each agency shall, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, review the employment policies of the agency to assess the agency’s compliance with Executive Order 11935 of September 2, 1976 (Citizenship Requirements for Federal Employment), and section 704 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Public Law 116-93.
(d) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall submit a report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget summarizing the results of the reviews required by subsections (a) through (c) of this section; recommending, if necessary, corrective actions that may be taken by the agency and timeframes to implement such actions; and proposing any Presidential actions that may be appropriate.
Sec. 3. Measures to Prevent Adverse Effects on United States Workers. Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Secretaries of Labor and Homeland Security shall take action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to protect United States workers from any adverse effects on wages and working conditions caused by the employment of H-1B visa holders at job sites (including third-party job sites), including measures to ensure that all employers of H-1B visa holders, including secondary employers, adhere to the requirements of section 212(n)
(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(n)(1)).
Thank you President Trump for looking out for Americans livelihoods, and ability to chase their dreams.
Tensions are at an all time high between those who wish to destroy, and those who wish to make America better for future generations. No matter what side of the political spectrum you are on, it is imperative for every American’s vote to count, without fraud or interference. Judicial Watch and (AEF) Allied Educational Foundation have been working behind the scenes to help make that happen. While America has been distracted by riots, protests, police brutality, Coronavirus, Lockdowns, etc… Judicial Watch and (AEF) have been fighting in court to make your vote count.
On July 31, 2020 Judicial Watch reported a huge win on behalf of all the people of Alabama who want to have their voices heard by casting their vote in a fair and free election.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit adopted the argument put forth by Judicial Watch and Allied Educational Foundation (AEF) in their amici curiae brief when it upheld Alabama’s 2011 Photo Voter Identification Law. The court ruled the law does not violate the 14th or 15th Amendments or the Voting Rights Act and that the anti-voter ID plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the Alabama law causes the denial or abridgment of the right to vote on account of race.
The appellate panel majority found:
The burden of providing a photo ID … in order to vote is a minimal burden on Alabama’s voters—especially when Alabama accepts so many different forms of photo ID and makes acquiring one simple and free for voters who lack a valid ID but wish to obtain one.
The Circuit Court’s ruling affirmed a lower-court ruling in Greater Birmingham Ministries, et al. v. Secretary of State of Alabama (No. 2:15-cv-02193), in which the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama upheld the Alabama Voter Photo ID Law in a decision handed down January 10, 2018. When the plaintiffs appealed the ruling, Judicial Watch, in conjunction with AEF, filed an amici curiae brief supporting the Act’s constitutionality.
As of April 2020, 34 states enforced (or were scheduled to begin enforcing) voter identification requirements. A total of 18 states required voters to present photo identification; the remainder accepted other forms of identification.
Commonly accepted forms of ID include driver’s licenses, state-issued identification cards, and military identification cards.
According to BallotPedia there are still sixteen states that do not require any form of voter identification in order to vote. Those states are Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, North Carolina, Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Wyoming, California, Nevada, and Oregon.
If you live in Alabama and need to obtain a Photo ID in order to vote, the Alabama Secretary of State provides free photo ID’s for those whom can not afford them. For your convenience they also have mobile locations available. If you know of, or believe you have witnessed voter or election fraud you can report it to the Secretary of State Stop Voter Fraud division.
Over half of the states within the United States of America have now issued some sort of “mandatory mask order”. People are being forced to wear masks under the guise “we must do this to protect our neighbors and communities”. These actions are not only unconstitutional, they are unethical, and science does not back up their claim.
“As of Monday, more than half of U.S. states have statewide mask mandates in place to curb the spread of the coronavirus.”
Main stream media has pushed “to stop the spread of coronavirus everyone must wear a mask”. Main stream media, and politicians have been telling people “wear a mask to help stop the spread of COVID19” for months. It appears as if they have been pushing propaganda not backed up in scientific studies to a trusting public. Is their conspiracy theory true? Do these masks really stop the spread of coronavirus? Let’s take a look.
“But the strongest evidence in favor of masks come from studies of real-world scenarios. “The most important thing are the epidemiologic data,” said Rutherford. Because it would be unethical to assign people to not wear a mask during a pandemic, the epidemiological evidence has come from so-called “experiments of nature.”
“Two studies in university settings assessed the effectiveness of face masks for primary protection by monitoring the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza among student hall residents for 5 months (9,10). The overall reduction in ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza cases in the face mask group was not significant in either studies (9,10).”
“Study designs in the 7 household studies were slightly different: 1 study provided face masks and P2 respirators for household contacts only (34), another study evaluated face mask use as a source control for infected persons only (35), and the remaining studies provided masks for the infected persons as well as their close contacts (11–13,15,17). None of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group (11–13,15,17,34,35)”
“Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids (36). There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
“In lower-income settings, it is more likely that reusable cloth masks will be used rather than disposable medical masks because of cost and availability (38). There are still few uncertainties in the practice of face mask use, such as who should wear the mask and how long it should be used for. In theory, transmission should be reduced the most if both infected members and other contacts wear masks, but compliance in uninfected close contacts could be a problem (12,34). Proper use of face masks is essential because improper use might increase the risk for transmission (39). “
“While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures. Surgical masks also do not provide complete protection from germs and other contaminants because of the loose fit between the surface of the mask and your face.”
N95 Masks:
“People with chronic respiratory, cardiac, or other medical conditions that make breathing difficult should check with their health care provider before using an N95 respirator because the N95 respirator can make it more difficult for the wearer to breathe.”
“N95 respirators are not designed for children or people with facial hair. Because a proper fit cannot be achieved on children and people with facial hair, the N95 respirator may not provide full protection.“
“Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds. A larger study is needed to definitively establish noninferiority of no mask use.”
“The mask that has the highest collection efficiency is not necessarily the best mask from the perspective of the filter-quality factor, which considers not only the capture efficiency but also the air resistance. Although surgical mask media may be adequate to remove bacteria exhaled or expelled by health care workers, they may not be sufficient to remove the submicrometer-sized aerosols containing pathogens to which these health care workers are potentially exposed. (AJIC AM J INFECT CONTROL 1992;20:177-84)”
“The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza. It suggests that N95 respirators should not be recommended for general public and nonhigh-risk medical staff those are not in close contact with influenza patients or suspected patients”
The question is why are certain main stream doctors pushing the everyone needs to wear a mask narrative so hard? Why are certain social media giants deleting facts, while falsely claiming the information coming from scientific studies published by NIH, CDC, FDA, and doctors are “false information”?
It appears the ultimate goal is control over the whole of the people, under the guise of “medical necessity”. The only way they can gain control is with the consent of the governed. When the governed do not speak out against these policies not backed by scientific evidence, the politicians then claim “implied consent” and pass their unconstitutional legislation or executive orders upon the masses.
Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution lists the only things Congress is allowed to regulate, no where do they have authority to regulate what you shall, or shall not do medically ! There is no provision in the constitution that states our employees [politicians] are allowed to violate our unalienable rights IF they feel they need to keep you from getting sick. It does NOT exist !
If you choose to wear a mask that is your individual choice, however for it to be “mandated” to wear a mask is a violation of your unalienable rights and could possibly place you at greater risk of infection. Know the facts, then make your informed decision whether to wear, or not to wear a mask.
![EXCLUSIVE: Emergency Lawsuit Filed Against Google & Youtube To Reverse Massive Election-Meddling Purge [Complaint Attached]](https://petersantilli.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Youtube.jpg)
