To Little? To Late? A Letter from a Facebook Jail

FREE AT LAST, FREE AT LAST

Today marks the date of my release from Facebook Jail, after serving a week long sentence, having followed two successive 30-day suspensions, and the last for simply clarifying a point of legal significance in the declaration of emergency promulgated by Governor of Virginia on March 12, 2020, and applying ex post facto, or retroactive, effect to tag posts dating back to January, overlapping my previous two suspensions, which, while attempting to serve as truth czar to promote the vaccinations policy of President Joe Biden, renders it an unconstitutional infringement against free speech, acting as an agent of a repressive and tyrannical government. But, when you snooze, you lose, woke or not.

While serving time in Facebook Jail, it appears more than coincidental that the hearing on the motion to dismiss the first filed and longest surviving challenge to the lockdowns in Democratic Party of Virginia occurred, which found Assistant Attorney General Robert B. McEntee, III presenting a fraud upon the court, with the court's acquiesence, and, at the beginning of this video, you can hear the surrogate ofMark Herring talking about rules not being followed, while overlooking the fact that a praecipe had been filed with the court with the orignal complaint, directing Alexandria Sheriff's Office, City of Alexandria, Virginia to serve process on the Commonwealth defendants, but who, in contempt of that court order, somehow was able to serve process upon Mayor Justin Wilson and AlexandriaVA.gov, who entered an appearance and denied a justiciable controversy, as well as avering that a member of FBCAlexandria who was a resident of Arlington County Virginia – Government lacked standing to bring suit.

There is a rule, overlooked by Attorney General Mark Herring, under Va. Code Section Va. Code § 8.01-271.1, which provide “(i) the signing of a pleading certifies that the party filing “[h]as read the pleadings, motion or paper, (ii) to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry, it is well (sic) grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification or reversal of existing law, and (iii) is not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation”, and ignoring the written pleadings before the court, as well as the service record that establishes that service of process was attempted, but only through the fault of court appointed officers, was it not perfected, and that rule requires, especially an attorney, to ensure that his arguments are founded in both fact and law, or be subject to sanction, or even disbarment, which obviously did not occur.

There is a rule, stated by the U.S. Supreme Court, in Prichard v. United State of Am., 339 U.S. 974, 70 S. Ct. 1029, 94 L. Ed. 1380 (1950), that, while judicial immunity traditionally serves to shield a judge from suits brought under Section 1983 for violations of civil rights, where his actions are solely judicial in nature, liable only for those ministerial or administrative acts, "In either capacity, knowledge of law violation may not be reposed in him under the cloak of privilege." And under the rule pronounced by the highest court in the land, under 18 U.S.C. Section 241, even a judge can be charged as a "conspiracy of one", if he was the most responsible for a conspiracy to violate civil rights.

As Arlington County Civic Federation president Duke Banks told InsideNoVA.com when in my race against Monique4APS - Monique O'Grady for Arlington School Board I found myself nixed from a candidate forum, permitting her to lose a debate against herself, "the rules are the rules." Or are they now?