The Missouri v. Biden case will go down in history as one of the most important civil liberties cases ever tried in a United States court. A ruling was issued yesterday, and while it would be considered a "minor" ruling in any other circumstance, the judge just smacked the government down once again; and this isn't a minor case or a minor ruling.
The parties have been going back and forth. As we know, the judge has entered two exceedingly rare orders in this case; first, he granted expedited discovery. For details, you can read this.
Then, once discovery started coming in, the Plaintiff's attorneys couldn't believe what they were reading and petitioned the court for expedited depositions. His order declared that several claims the Plaintiffs had made about social media censorship had already been PROVEN. Unheard of, but true. The claims were proven via discovery, and discovery has demonstrated an active and wide-ranging effort to censor and target Americans based on their thoughts and speech. This article details everything in the judge's order, and it's something.
The UncoverDC article was written before "The Intercept" wrote their (now viral) story. The Intercept column was based on the discovery in THIS CASE. So, once the judge ordered expedited discovery, the government shenanigans began.
The government (Defendants in this case) started filing motions to stop people from being deposed and, in other cases, to delay it due to circumstances they outlined that are inane and ridiculous. Then, they filed a mandamus in the appellate court to stop the depositions altogether. The Plaintiffs (MO and LA) consented to a short delay in deposition, bringing them to early December.
That wasn't good enough for the government, of course, so the Defendants filed a motion to stay the depositions and outline all of their nonsense reasons why they would be irreparably harmed by having to expedite their depositions. They also claimed that the appellate court may rule that the parties won't have to sit for deposition at all and that some of the material is privileged—all of which the judge had already addressed.
Judges don't like that. Today, the judge ruled on their request.
He ruled that their request for a stay was DENIED, which means that no matter what happens in the appellate court, they must sit for these depositions because, as the judge so eloquently writes, the harm they are causing to Americans far supersedes any of their nonsense excuses.
This is the most important case in decades for the protection of free speech and against government overreach. Here is a link to the order so you can read along.
Please take the time to read this. It outlines all of the topics at hand where the government is actively working to censor views and facts that counter their approved narratives. Understand that this lawsuit covers every major issue in this country today—not just COVID, but also election integrity and the Biden Laptop story.
They filed their mandamus in the higher court to bar CISA, the Surgeon General, and the director of Digital Strategy for the White House from having to testify. Their depositions are scheduled for December.
The judge outlines the four criteria the court will use to decide a stay. Note the last one is the Public Interest. Now he will go on to analyze each of these. This is where it gets good and where we see just how seriously this judge is taking this case.
First, the judge chastises them for even filing a mandamus petition in the first place. Basically, what a mandamus petition is, is a petition asking a higher court to come in and rule that the lower court has done something VERY wrong in its decision-making; it's a slap at the judge and is usually only used when there isn't another remedy, and something is outrageous. Recall the General Flynn case where Sidney Powell filed a Writ of Mandamus. THOSE are proper circumstances.
1. Vivek Murthy needs to sit. The judge quickly outlines why and the seriousness of the matter. He CLEARLY did act to censor speech or took actions in furtherance of that end goal, and the Plaintiffs need to get him under oath to ask him questions. They need to fill in the gaps.
Remember, they did a lot of this right in the public eye. Much of the evidence is their public comment buttressed by private emails.
"Their hubris will be their downfall."
I want to take a second to discuss the privilege claims. The government is claiming that these high-level officials are protected by privilege. But they aren't. See, although they act like a corporate fascist government, we still have a Constitution, and once you email and converse with PRIVATE companies, you lose that privilege. End of story.
2. Jen Easterly: She DEFINITELY needs to sit. Carefully read the following that the judge placed in this order. It isn't a question; this is stated as FACT. "…supervising the "nerve center" of federally directed censorship."
Also, the judge used a higher standard to determine whether they needed to testify than was required, and they still failed—they need to sit. This is huge, and I hope I am doing a good job of stressing to you how SERIOUS this really is.
3. Flaherty: He needs to sit as well, and the judge also declares that the parties aren't likely to succeed on mandamus.
The court finds the parties wouldn't suffer "irreparable harm" by sitting for depositions. (As an aside, one of the reasons given was that Easterly (CISA) needs her maternity leave… I will just leave that there so you can get a sense of their priorities)
"The loss of First Amendment freedoms, even for minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury." Injunctions protecting First Amendment freedoms are always in the public interest. The Court finds that both the public interest and the interest of the other parties in preserving free speech significantly outweighs the inconvenience the three deponents will have in preparing for and giving their depositions."
This case has brought to the fore a wide-reaching, insidious plot to weaponize private business in a fascist attempt to stifle the speech of American citizens. Not only is it the stifling of speech, but it is a weaponization to ensure the American people are DECEIVED by government-sponsored propaganda. This isn't surface level; these actions have swayed elections and caused the DEATH of untold numbers of Americans. It has polarized our society. It is evil. It must be stopped.
________________________________________________________________________
Head over to BlueMonsterPrep and ensure your family is prepared for any situation!
