>>17951930

Surer than shit, Poppy was running this alleged "S-Team", as he was the WH Plumbers after making his bones in Dallas and in LA with Bobby.

>>17951948

That was a SECOND USSS agent who jumped in ontop of JFK. The Z film was so edited that it removed this and the fact that the USSS agent William Greer, the driver, brought the limo to a near complete stop for the head shot.

Greer was a co-conspirator who violated the No. 1 SS rule upon hearing a shot or any threatening disturbance, e.g., a comotion, a person running towards the open limo. Greer should have instantly floored the car.

Because he braked so hard (brakelights obvious), the two Dallas City PD motorcycle cops trailing behind the limo had to veer left coming even with the left, rear quarter panel. It was the testimony of one of these cops that his motorcycle windscreen was splattered with blood and brain tissue.

This testimony corresponds to a shot from the right side grassy knoll, barricade fence. And the "back and to the left" testimony of JFK's head movement from the fatal shot.

But yes, a second USSS agent was able to jump on top of JFK BEFORE the limo sped away.

>>17951923

Top ten finest in anon's six decades. Both of these ladies would be side-eyeing her!

Anons! Get in here. Beanz WAS JUST re-suspended because some DS mole at Twitter tried to shut her down about tomorrow's SCOTUS case Missouri v. Biden because the issue is THE REACH OF TWITTER in an ELECTION.

Anon believes THIS may be the reason for Trump's Speech against Digital Censorship!!

I managed to scrape the following from the pleadings:

white-house-flags-big-tech-digital-policing-harmeetdhillon. Once in power, Biden and those acting in concert with him would continue this same course of conduct of “flagging” content for censorship by private social-media firms, now using the authority of the federal government to “flag” specific speech and speakers for censorship and suppression.”

“181. This was one of a “series” of meetings between major social-media companies and government officials about the suppression of election-related “misinformation”: “‘We held the latest in a series of meetings with government partners today where we each provided updates on what we’re seeing on our respective platforms and what we expect to see in the coming months,’ companies including Google, Facebook, Twitter and Reddit said in a joint statement after the meeting.””

“187, At the same time, “Twitter also modified its rules, stating: ‘we may label and reduce the visibility of Tweets containing false or misleading information about civic processes in order to provide additional context’ in its Civic integrity policy.” Id.”

Read more:

Katie Hobbs Arizona Secretary of State silences Twitter user via request…

>>17952319

CASE SUMMARY

Public statements, emails, and recent publicly released documents establish that the President of the United States and other senior officials in the Biden Administration violated the First Amendment by directing social-media companies to censor viewpoints that conflict with the government’s messaging on Covid-19.

NCLA joined the lawsuit, State of Missouri ex rel. Schmitt, et al. v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., et al., representing renowned epidemiologists and co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines. Social media platforms, acting at the federal government’s behest, repeatedly censored NCLA’s clients for articulating views on those platforms in opposition to government-approved views on Covid-19 restrictions.

This insidious censorship was the direct result of the federal government’s ongoing campaign to silence those who voice perspectives that deviate from those of the Biden Administration. Government officials’ public threats to punish social media companies that did not do their bidding demonstrate this linkage, as do emails from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to social media companies that only recently were made public.

Government-induced censorship is achieved through a wide variety of mechanisms, ranging from complete bans, temporary bans, “shadow bans” (where often neither the user nor his audience is notified of the suppression of speech), deboosting, de-platforming, de-monetizing, restricting access to content, requiring users to take down content, and imposing warning labels that require click-through to access content, among others. These methods also include temporary and permanent suspensions of disfavored speakers.

This sort of censorship, which strikes at the heart of what the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was designed to protect—free speech, especially political speech—constitutes unlawful government action. The federal government is deciding whose voices and ideas may be heard, and whose voices and ideas must be silenced. Moreover, this state action deprives Americans of their right to hear the views of those who are being silenced, a First Amendment corollary of the right to free speech. The government’s policy of coercing social-media companies to censor Plaintiffs’ viewpoints should be declared unlawful and halted immediately.

https://nclalegal.org/state-of-missouri-ex-rel-schmitt-et-al-v-biden-et-al/

The Missouri v. Biden case is the most important civil liberties case we have seen in years and may be the most important ever. The case is brought by Missouri and Louisiana, along with other individual plaintiffs. It asks the court to bar the government from colluding with social media companies to limit free speech.

Yesterday the judge entered a ruling on the motions that were before him. The Biden Administration had appealed to a three-judge panel at the 5th circuit to either bar the lower court from forcing the depositions or make them depose less senior officials. The 5th circuit declined to bar the judge from doing anything, instead asking him to revisit the potential of less obstructive means of obtaining the information needed. (Side note: the transcripts of Elvis Chan and Anthony Fauci come from this case.)

The judge in LA asked the Plaintiffs to brief him again on whether there were other people who could answer the Plaintiffs’ questions to prove their case for a temporary injunction and asked the defendants to respond. The Plaintiff’s response is in the article above. The Defendants told the judge he should pause all of this while their motion to dismiss the case in total was on the table.

The Defendants want all of this discovery and deposition to stop and don’t want to have to answer to anyone. This judge isn’t having it. What follows now is a breakdown of his order, filed yesterday.

As an aside, I broke out the Jen Psaki piece of this, even going so far as to read the transcript from HER judge shopping expedition in Virginia court. They really don’t want her deposed. But we are about to learn what will happen.

As usual, in any filing or order, you get a brief summary of “what is this about, and why are we here.” It makes it easy to understand what the parties are arguing at that particular time and why"….

https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/12/08/judge-in-missouri-v-biden-to-jen-psaki-and-others-you-are-being-deposed/

Judge in Missouri v. Biden just ruled on 5th circuits request for depositions— Jen Psaki MUST be deposed. All other depositions of alternative bureaucrats granted. #Missouri #Biden

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.148.0.pdf

h/t

@TracyBeanz

via Telegram

https://t.me/TracybeanzOfficial

https://twitter.com/redbasilnc/status/1600667552799080448