22 Comments
author

Original version incorrectly stated Judge's name as Matthew Truncale. His name is Michael Truncale. Error now corrected!

Expand full comment

Michael, and Matthew are both Biblical names. I pray for his Biblical wisdom.

Expand full comment

Praying for the judge and Brooke & team.

Expand full comment
Oct 28, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

I heave a deep sigh at all the work you do. You are an inspiration to keep on keeping on.

Blessings and be well,

william

Expand full comment
author

Thank you.

Expand full comment

Katherine, another concise and powerful analysis! What can the everyday people that are awake and aware of the 4th Unelected Branch of Government's (DOD, et al) criminality and war crimes do? Are there actions you recommend the people can take specifically against this known charade of Clinical Trials and their poisonous fruits, the 'data and results' the FDA and CDC use to support the destructive and rights-limiting Guidance they to our People (through the media), our Government Agencies, and Corporations? Perhaps something we can file in court in support of Brook Jackson's case? And if not that, can we hold our own local government officials, employers and others accountable with this knowledge?

Expand full comment

Thank you for publishing your research. Every avenue of resistance must be tried until one gains traction. The enemy is not an idiot but they may have made mistakes that can be exploited and they may have left some lever that we can use.

Expand full comment

Thank u

Expand full comment
author

U r welcome.

Thank u for reading.

:-)

Expand full comment

🤗

Expand full comment

Improved situation for travelers to PH: https://youtu.be/72GaNe5co8w?t=99

EO #7 has now been signed

Expand full comment
Oct 28, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

Thank you for the update.

Expand full comment
author

You’re welcome.

Expand full comment

🤗🤗 I'm so glad your most excellent substack is finally getting the attention it deserves from some of the lead activists, like Dr McCullough. Thank you for the thousands of hours you have dedicated to the minutia of legalities around this con of the millennium.👏👏👏👍🙏❤

Expand full comment

The enormous complexities of what is legally ultimately a rather straightforward case of coporate criminal fraud make me wonder about the wisdom of a shotgun pro se strategy that Todd Calendar has in mind. I can see some obvious benefit to it in that maybe some pro se litigants luck into an honest judge's courtroom, are competent enough therein, and that their discovery turns up damaging info or the case even results in a sound judgement for a pro se plaintiff but given how rigged the system is it raises alot of questions.

Expand full comment
author
Oct 29, 2022·edited Oct 29, 2022Author

As I understand it, Callender isn’t advocating that pro se litigants bring the complex fraud and mass murder cases.

He’s advocating that they bring tens of thousands of medical malpractice, negligent homicide, false imprisonment, employment discrimination and other personal civil and criminal cases.

As Dave Chapelle once put it, talking about his experience buying a shotgun for home security and the advice of the gun shop owner: birdshot and buckshot.

Legal birdshot, legal buckshot, legal slugs, legal cannon balls — all working together.

WARNING: Lots of cuss words in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bEsBCfQj3c

Expand full comment

Not knowing nearly as much about how our legal systems work as do you I've long wondered if citizens, say former Asst. U.S. or US Attorneys, could bring serious federal criminal charges against the federal government without attorneys of the DOJ involved? US, states, and county prosecutors all seem to handle aspects of various levels of criminal code violations. I know Larry Klayman has done some unusual litigation but I never looked into it deeply, and he had some odd falling out with his team so Tom Fitton took over the org that Larry founded.

Expand full comment

Are you saying that once Jackson's legal team embarks upon this pathway they can pursue no other, even if discovery uncovers some new information? Or are you saying they are using this approach to achieve discovery so as to throw the door open to other avenues later?

Expand full comment
author

If her case survives this motion to dismiss, then discovery can proceed and if new information is uncovered, they can use that to make additional arguments and pursue other avenues going forward.

There are other things they could do if they get past the MtD hurdle. Jackson’s team could make a motion for summary judgment, asking the judge to simply decide the case in Jackson’s favor based on the evidence already provided.

There are other things the judge himself could do, including sua sponte order, deciding the case in Jackson’s favor based on the evidence already provided and without any request from Jackson for summary judgment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sua_sponte

A lot of things could happen. I don’t know which of them will happen.

Expand full comment

Understood. Thanks.

Expand full comment