Plaintiffs in a case that has revealed evidence of collusion between big tech and government officials to censor users, are now looking to depose ten top officials.
One of those officials happens to be Presdient Biden’s chief medical adviser; Dr. Anthony Fauci.
BYPASS THE CENSORS
Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.
You can unsubscribe any time. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use
In a recent motion, the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri and other plaintiffs have asked a US court to allow them to depose Fauci, FBI special agent Elvis Chan, former White House press secretary Jen Psaki; Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and Rob Flaherty, deputy assistant to the president.
The Epoch Times report: They also want to question five other officials, including Carol Crawford, chief of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Digital Media Branch.
While emails and other documents uncovered in discovery have revealed an “enormous and far-reaching” censorship enterprise, the discovery “makes very clear that federal officials have frequently engaged in their most telling and probative communications with social media companies orally, not in writing,” plaintiffs said in a joint statement with defendants.
“Perhaps not surprisingly, the more senior the federal official involved, the more likely they appear to have been to rely on oral, rather than written, communications to pressure social-media platforms to censor,” the statement also said.
Fauci, for instance, communicated in a long-shielded phone call with some scientists who went on to write a paper castigating others who were open to the theory that the COVID-19 virus came from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, where the first COVID-19 cases were detected.
Fauci was also in touch with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, although the content of oral communications between the two “is yet to be revealed,” the new filing, dated Oct. 14, says.
Fauci hasn’t made any statements under oath about his communications with big tech firms such as Facebook, despite that the judge overseeing the case ordered the government to provide answers from Fauci to questions, plaintiffs said.
Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, the lead plaintiffs and both Republicans, announced recently they planned to seek depositions but hadn’t identified any officials who they would seek to depose.
Proposed Schedule
Plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, a Trump appointee overseeing the case, to greenlight the 10 requested depositions. If Doughty agrees, the depositions would take place during a 30-day window.
Doughty already agreed to the plaintiff’s request to expedite discovery. That led to the production of hundreds of pages of documents, which bolstered plaintiff claims of Big Tech–government collusion.
In that order, Doughty said plaintiffs could alert defendants to any depositions plaintiffs wished to take, and that the parties would then meet to confer on any deposition requests.
If the parties didn’t agree on the depositions, a joint statement would be submitted to outline their differences.
Doughty has seven days to rule on the new filing, which included objections from the government.
Department of Justice lawyers said that plaintiffs usually take no more than 10 depositions during normal discovery, and taking that many during expedited discovery would be too burdensome.
Although a plaintiff is rarely entitled to expedited discovery, Plaintiffs here have received a substantial amount. Defendants produced more than 15,000 pages of non-privileged responsive e-mails, and they answered numerous interrogatories. Plaintiffs cannot demonstrate that still more discovery—particularly burdensome depositions—is warranted at this stage of the case,” they said.
If any depositions are authorized, Doughty should exclude officials who weren’t originally served with discovery requests, high-ranking officials, and certain other officials, the government lawyers said.
Plaintiffs said the arguments in opposition are meritless and should be rejected.
The descriptions of some officials as too “high-level” to be deposed is outweighed by the officials all having firsthand knowledge of the matter and the information they hold can’t be obtained elsewhere, plaintiffs said, referring to a ruling in a separate case, United States v. Newman.
Niamh Harris
Latest posts by Niamh Harris (see all)
- Zelensky Says US Politicians ‘Don’t Care About Ukraine’ - April 17, 2024
- Telegram Founder Says Apple & Google More Dangerous Than Governments - April 17, 2024
- Controversial TikTok Star Kyle Marisa Roth Dead At 36 - April 17, 2024
It would be lovely to see these demons pay for their crimes but sadly the only true judgement they’ll face is when they face the Lord on the Day of Judgement.
Fauci should hqve been jailed 40 years ago And his wife who tells young fit health college students to volunteer for totally dangerous medical research as their social duty. She should be flogged to within an inch of her life then hung till nearly dead and then roasted in open skillet over a low heat.
And she is head of ethics at NIH.
Where does Fauci’s Grand Jury sleep? In the White House?
Smart of these criminals to have their discussions orally. I thought they were all stupid enough to leave records of all their criminal acts, with the way they tend to announce their crimes publicly with a smirk or a grin, or in a book. I guess some of them have learned a thing or two in recent years about weaponized autism.
This immoral quack should have been deposed long ago, when he started sleeping with the NIH head of ethics. Seems odd that they are so stupid as to not see the ethics violations.
We, the People DO NOT HAVE A LEGIMATE “President”, We Have Another Usurper:
July 4, 2022
By Its Silence in Court, Congress Has Legally Admitted Mr. Biden Did Not Win the Presidency
On December 17, 2020, and again on January 4, 2021, every member of Congress was served with a Petition for Redress of specific violations of the Electors Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 1) that took place in 31 States throughout 2020. One thousand fifty-eight (1058) citizens residing in all fifty States signed the Petition. Congress was asked to refute the facts or direct the 31 States to re-do their elections in keeping with the mandate of the Electors Clause.
Congress did not respond to either Petition for Redress of the Grievance. Instead, on January 6, 2021, Congress certified the electoral votes of those 31 States, without any investigation, knowing the 401 electors from those 31 States were not constitutionally chosen and thus no candidate for President and Vice President received a majority of the 538 available electoral votes.
On February 14, 2021, Robert Schulz, Anthony Futia Jr. and all others similarly situated filed a Complaint in the D.C. District Court against the Congress of the United States. For relief, the Court was asked to direct the House to choose the President, and direct the Senate to choose the Vice President, all in accordance with the terms of the 12th Amendment.
Congress did not respond to the lawsuit or the Court Summons and made no appearance in either the District Court or the Court of Appeals.
The lower courts dismissed the case for lack of standing.
The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 27, 2022 it was assigned Case No. 21-1593.
American Jurisprudence 2d (Am Jur 2d) is the legal profession’s leading legal reference.
According to 32 AMJUR POF 2d 253:
Silence constitutes admission in civil proceedings when circumstances are such that one ought to speak and does not.
A party’s silence may be construed for evidentiary purposes as a tacit admission of the facts stated where a statement is made in its presence in regard to facts affecting its rights, and it makes no reply.
NOTE: Here, a statement in the form of a Complaint with a detailed statement of the facts proving that 63 violations of the Electors Clause occurred in 31 States was served on every member of Congress.
It is frequently held that evidence of a party’s silence can be introduced as proof of an admission if the following conditions are shown to have existed:
the statement in question was made in the party’s presence and hearing. NOTE: Every member of the Senate and every member of the House of Representatives along with the Senate Legal Counsel and the Office of General Counsel of the House of Representatives were served with a complete copy of the Complaint, and
the party was capable of understanding the meaning of the statement, and
the party had sufficient knowledge of the facts embraced in the statement to reply thereto, and
the party was at liberty to deny the statement or otherwise respond to it, and
the statement was made under such circumstances as would naturally call for a reply, and
the statement was made by a person normally entitled to a reply.
Here, each of the listed conditions existed. Congress had a duty as a defendant in a court of law to respond to Petitioners’ claims, and it was fully capable of responding to the two principal claims:
1) that no candidate for President and no candidate for Vice President received a majority (270) of the available 538 electoral votes because 401 votes were cast by Electors from 31 States who were unconstitutionally chosen and thus whose votes had no legal force, binding power or validity, leaving only 137 constitutionally valid electoral votes to be cast, and
2) that by knowingly certifying the electoral votes cast by Electors who were unconstitutionally chosen Congress displaced the power committed by the Constitution to the State Legislatures to determine how votes of presidential Electors are to be obtained.
There are no issues of fact. Congress’ silence equates to admission.
=====
ALSO: Obama’s Lawyers Officially Admit Birth Certificate is Fake
NOTHING Obama or Biden Signed or Did In Our Name Is Legal or Binding – NOTHING.