34 Comments

I have told at least 1000 people by now about the importance of this case.

Our government , the radicals,the medical establishment (and insurance companies), and most reporters are among the millions of people who do not want the AMERICAN PEOPLE healthy.

I sent a check to help in your fight ... and I pray GOD continues to give you the strength to continue.

You certainly have the intelligence and the writing skills.

T H A N K Y O U

Expand full comment
founding

They are scared shitless because free speech is the only cure for The Bluebonic Plague.

Specifically, tearing down the edifice of lies that camoflauge ideological uniformity with cultural diversity.

Expand full comment

GO GET EM ALEX

Expand full comment

You write: "...at this stage of the case, we do not need the same level of evidence that we will need to convince a judge that a jury should hear our lawsuit, precisely because we have not yet had the chance for discovery. We just need to present reasonable theories supported with specific evidence — “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face,” in the words of the Supreme Court."

This is absolutely correct. I studied this aspect of the law for my case. The Supreme Court did say as much. HOWEVER, Districts Courts are evading the law using two other Supreme decisions. (Your attorney knows them.) Based on illegitimate legal reasoning, the Courts are denying petitioners a jury trial and are using Rule 12 Motions to Dismiss to justify ad hoc bench trials that DO consider evidentiary issues without you being able to engage in discovery or cross-examination. I was stunned at how corrupt they are. But, unlike me, you probably have the ability to go to appeal, which may keep them in check. Best wishes.

Expand full comment

strange times

we are either 3 weeks away from kamala packing the supreme court with 7 mentally handicapped, communist (but i repeat myself) judges of various ethnicities and sexualities to permanently shred our constitution like what happened to the snow mexicans up north in canada

- or -

we are 3 weeks from donald trump letting elon fire any government worker who doesn't retweet his memes and rfk forcing the NIH to research ways to make america healthy again

Expand full comment
Oct 16·edited Oct 16

In that mention of August 2021, and the knowing EUA gene therapy medication injection mandates were pending. It reminded me of what a few of us did in a BLUE capital city on a blustery cold April 2020 day protesting along side roughly 500 others. That protest was very early on in plandemic, and about the "essential vs non essential" business coercion going on at that time. The 3 of us KNEW what was really going on, and we said it clearly in the signs we carried in that protest. We said "The END GAME are INJECTION MANDATES" (I for one have NEVER uttered the word V#%%@&E since these injections were never a V). We 3 were the only ones in that crowd with such signs. I firmly believe to this day the WUH FLU was made for the injections and not the other way around. Of course we were all called conspiracists as those like us here were on so many aspects of the great 2020 plandemic

Expand full comment

I can't donate right now (STILL out of work thanks to Bidenomics and the HARRIS-Biden administration), but happy to spread the word and to share words of support right here. You are doing God's work, Alex! As Chris Brown said below, GO GET EM!!!

Expand full comment

I am on your side, in your camp, on your team! Go Alex go!!!!

Expand full comment

Alex, I love your Substack, and I have been a faithful subscriber for the last couple of years. I bought all your covid chapters as you released them on Amazon, and I bought Pandemia. I think Berenson v Biden is a solid case, and I think you should pursue it as hard as you can to the very end. But I only just recently realized one (not so small) detail. Your case is a civil case. Not sure if you mentioned this before and I missed it, but it raised an eyebrow with regards to fund raising for such a case. I believe you to be an honest and earnest reporter and I don't want that opinion of you to ever change. So maybe you can clarify a few questions I have with regards to this fact...

1) Can you explain if there is likely to be a significant difference between what YOUR ideal victory looks like and what a probable victory will look like within the parameters of a civil lawsuit?

2) Will a victory in a civil lawsuit amount to anything more than a financial settlement in your favor, which would more likely than not be sealed (as it was in your Berenson v Twitter case)? Meaning there may or may not be an admission of guilt from them that they wronged YOU, but that victory will likely not mean anything in terms of policy changes or protections being instituted to protect the masses from similar treatment in future because of your lawsuit.

3) IF the result of this lawsuit is a financial settlement in your favor, do you feel it would’ve been ethical to have raised money from your subscribers to win a case that you stand to solely gain financially? IF not, why do you feel it is okay?

4) I believe you had a financial windfall from your Twitter case, don't you believe the dollars won in that case should be fully exhausted in funding your Berenson v Biden case before requesting any donations for your new case? If not, can you explain why? Is that money currently funding your case? If not, can you explain why?

5) If you were to receive a large settlement because of this case, do you intend to reimburse those who donated to fund your legal fees for you to present your case? Possibly even their original donation + a percentage proportional to the amount gained from the lawsuit? If not, why do you feel that would not be the right thing to do?

Hopefully none of my concerns have any validity to them and the questions have quick and reasonable answers, so I hope you will take some time to address them. The last thing I would like to think is you are fund raising for your legal fees from your faithful subscribers so you can financially benefit yourself, because I don't believe that to be ethical. I believe you were wronged by our government, and they should be held accountable. But if your goal is to prove that in court so as to prevent it from happening again to anyone else, I need your help convincing me civil court is the right venue to make that happen. What am I missing?

Expand full comment

All to create a few billionaires. What the hell is wrong with these people? By banning you, Twitter made Substack, no doubt. Just bad business all around. Get these bastards and make them pay!

Expand full comment

I'm with you all the way, Alex - go get them.

Expand full comment

Not to rain on your parade, but that judge was nominated by Biden and barely squeaked by the approval process. The deck is stacked Alex.

Expand full comment

Read the filing. First, I do support your effort. With that in mind, I will offer a few concerns based on my own (limited) experience. Potential roadblocks. The District Courts (with very few exceptions) will do ANYTHING to prevent you from suing the U.S. Government. The Judge may argue you have sued the wrong party. They may say your beef is with Twitter and their moderation. Sue Twitter they will say. And, they will say that if the Feds interfered with Twitter in moderating your posts, then Twitter has to sue the Feds IF IF IF there was a real contract between you and Twitter that they interfered with... and they turn that detail into a Mt. Everest challenge. They may say that your relief consists of going to Congress and having them toughen Oversight. They will argue like a junk yard guard dog that you have no right to sue Feds who were simply doing their jobs to carry out policy. (The evidence be damned.) I was shocked at the Supreme decision in Murthy, but they followed the above poor reasoning. In my case the District Court made a phony issue out of "there was no contract" (when there was). The Defendants simply perjured themselves and represented there was no contract. No evidence or cross allowed. And my contract was much, much more solid than what you had with Twitter. I'm thinking your attorney will have to close that door in the Reply.

Expand full comment

You continue to give me hope, lots and lots of hope! Power on!

Expand full comment

Keep on pushing Alex - so proud of you for taking this very important stand!

Expand full comment

"So the defendants, including former Biden official Andy Slavitt and Pfizer board member Dr. Scott Gottlieb, still haven’t turned over any records or communications with each other or government contacts related to the case."

At this point, what are the chances that those records and documents even still exist? Why wouldn't they all have been Bleach-Bitted by now? Erased and scrubbed permanently?

Expand full comment