SSDN
'John Barron'
https://twitter.com/barronjohn1946
only started being posted here the last few days,
and the one many anons have been eyes on for a while -
https://twitter.com/PapiTrumpo/
Both in notables as 'POTUS tweet' or similar - parody not mentioned.
*actually it could have been https://twitter.com/johnbarron1946_
fugg knows now, let me check notables from last night…Oh right, can't because the bread was deleted along with another one.
Funny how the Admin/baker issues here are anologous to the issues with government.
Empty promises and narratives, actions very different.
There was no CP in the two breads deleted when anons moved to fresh breads.
All in the 'National Interest' anon, it's fine /s
Q's been gone publicly for over a year, re-auth would be necessary, and I would expect Q team to expect no less from anons.
Those weren't Q posts(period), likely why the evidence of them is gone. Plus, don't want 'newanons' knowing about the B fuggery. Operation memory hole seems to be going well.
Lots of newanons here of late, it doesn't seem organic, just another string in the bow…
The duplicating the hash stuff was primarily to 'prove' the new fake Q's were authentic. And then trying to add weight if Papi or one of the John Barron accounts posted similar (I can't rememembe - I said my piece then on fake Q posts and went back to doing what anons do.
If you're not aware of the B fuggery in projectdcomms then you're likely too new (not a diss) to get that kitchen fuggery has been going on all the time, since day 1 - it's why we ended up on 8kun. Anons have put up with it to a point whilst they could still do what's required.
Different anons have different thresholds as to when the fuggery gets too much, they speak up and get gaslighted, lumped into a 'crew.'
SOP for anons is assume the kitchen is comped - if you start from that premise, you can't go far wrong.
All for a larp….
sincerely, anon
RE-posting
New Filing: Giuffre v. Prince Andrew (1:21-cv-06702)
District Court, S.D. New York
Filed over the weekend. Asking court to be allowed to send letters of request to witnesses in UK & AUS.
Jan 15, 2022
SCHEDULING ORDER: (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 1/15/2022) (Kaplan, Lewis) (Entered: 01/15/2022)
Docket:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60119368/giuffre-v-prince-andrew
The scheduling order direct link:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.564713/gov.uscourts.nysd.564713.69.0.pdf
TAFKAP now - Andrew Albert Christian Edward - personal capacity.
>>Ghislaine Maxwell is set to expose the names of eight VIP pedophiles who raped children as part of a deal to get a lesser sentence following her conviction for child sex trafficking. - en-volve [other sources saying same]
January 12, 2022
Honorable Loretta A. Preska
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007
Re: Defendant’s Position re. Unsealing Documents Related to Non-Parties 17, 53,
54, 55, 56, 73, 93, and 151
Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP)
Dear Judge Preska:
After careful review of the detailed objections submitted by Non-Party Does 17, 53,
54, 55, 73, 93 and 151, counsel for Ghislaine Maxwell writes to inform the Court that she
does not wish to further address those objections. See Dkt. 1230 at 2.
Each of the listed Does has counsel who have ably asserted their own respective
privacy rights. Ms. Maxwell therefore leaves it to this Court to conduct the appropriate
review consistent with the Order and Protocol for Unsealing Decided Motions. Dkt. 1108 at 5
("The Court will conduct a particularized review of the Sealed Materials and weigh the
competing interests regardless whether it receives any Non-Party Objection.").
Respectfully submitted,
Laura A. M
Letter:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1238.0.pdf
Docket:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4355835/giuffre-v-maxwell/
What is a non-party in a case?
A non-party is a person who is not a named party in the lawsuit. He is neither the plaintiff nor defendant, and he does not have an interest in the lawsuit.