Note: If you feel that I have shown clear and convincing evidence to you that the fourth circuit is the ones in the wrong and not Brian D. Hill, feel free to sign the petition to have President Donald J. Trump grant Brian a full pardon. Visit justiceforuswgo.nl/pardon or justicefopruswgo.wordpress.com/pardon. Sign the petition and spread it with everyone you know.

by Laurie Azgard

The fourth circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals have gone and done it this time, they lie again in opinions against the appeals of Brian D. Hill of USWGO alternative news and then toss out each and every appeal Brian had ever filed requesting relief. This time they throw out appeal of the supervised release revocation judgment by the DisHonorable Thomas David Schroeder that was entered on October 7, 2019. They did so knowing about the fraudulent begotten judgments, knowing of the lies of the government.

This blog did not wanted to write any attack piece on the fourth circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals out of fear of retaliation, but they have given their repeated disdain for case law, evidence, the Government not disputing or not contesting claims by Brian Hill the criminal defendant and favorable to the defense, and they have repeatedly bucked the Supreme Court decisions of the past acting as though they are a lawful constitutional Article III tribunal. This article will show evidence that they have done nothing but lied, cheated, and stolen constitutional rights and civil liberties guarantees against the criminal defendant favorable to the deep state swamp that Donald Trump had a difficult time even draining because of the repeated attacks, repeated lies, and repeated coup attempts against the President of the United States lawfully elected by the electoral college in 2016. Electoral colleges are almost impossible to commit election fraud versus the popular vote which is the reason why corrupt democrats love the popular vote and hate the electoral college because it is almost impossible to rig the votes since the electoral voters are less than 1,000 nationwide. Anyways, the fourth circuit has repeatedly shown that they have a disdain for the constitution and the Supreme Court, acting as though only the lower courts and their court is the only precedent they will accept and reject everything else, like a Nazi Gestapo Tribunal acting as a court. It is essentially acting as an illegitimate and unconstitutional court of law, protecting the lower illegitimate and unconstitutional court of law depriving due process and effective counsel systematically with all federal prisoners and probationers. When effective counsel is appointed like Attorney Edward Ryan Kennedy, they buck the attorney and act as though the attorney was wrong. Well in Nazi Germany, they had a Constitution too called the Weimar Constitution [Weimarer Verfassung] with rights and maybe branches of government, however Adolf Hitler had torn apart that constitution and acted as though he was furor and that he was above any law and that no Supreme Court or high court could ever block him and his Nazi soldiers. It may technically look like there was still a constitution during the Nazi Party, but it had went unenforced just like the fourth circuit refusing to protect any and all constitutional rights of all district courts throughout that federal circuit which includes the states Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Maryland. Mainly it covers the states that are very close to if not neighboring Washington, DC. There are states that border Washington, DC and that is part of the fourth circuit areas.

First of all, upon examining the opinion dated October 16, 2020, it is the exact same panel of judges who denied Brian’s petition for a writ of mandamus earlier this year under false pretenses or incorrect pretenses.

Both of the three-panel of judges who had denied of the writ of mandamus with their opinion and then the opinion of October 16, 2020, are both from the exact same writ panel of the very same three judges, which would be through judges Allison Jones Rushing, Albert Diaz, and Pamela A. Harris. Those same judges ruled that Brian’s petition for writ of mandamus was used only as a way to circumvent the appeal process under law which they also mentioned the appeal of the revocation of supervised release, as if the entire petition was only to circumvent appeal when that is a big fat lie. For those who read the actual petition for writ of mandamus, it asks for action by the Court when the motions were not contested and not disputed by the U.S. attorney. Brian may not have clearly explained that too well but even pro se filings have to be treated as liberally construed when filed, and when a motion is uncontested it clearly should be granted in it’s normal course. Then in the filed reply to the government’s opposition brief filing, Brian had demonstrated the proper local rule [LR 7.3 MOTION PRACTICE] cited which had said “If a respondent fails to file a response within the time required by this rule, the motion will be considered and decided as an uncontested motion, and ordinarily will be granted without further notice.” Since the judge would not make a decision in regards to at least four undisputed and uncontested motions, they should have normally been granted as a matter of law. Yet the Court of Appeals and the U.S. corrupt assistant attorney Anand Prakash Ramaswamy both argued that Brian is represented by counsel and should not use mandamus as a way to circumvent direct appeal. However you cannot appeal a decision to a motion when no such decision was yet made, mandamus relief is appropriate to compel a lower court to do it’s duty and make a decision on a motion that was pending before the court. If the court rules and laws say the motion must be granted when undisputed/uncontested and in regards to frauds upon the court, it should have been granted and mandamus relief would have been appropriately used.

Judge Thomas Schroeder knew that with the local rules of the court and the laws, he may be forced to grant the motions for sanctions as a matter of local law of his court. That would undo two probation violations on record against Brian, and would also likely undo the wrongful conviction of Brian D. Hill ending his sentence and ending his felony conviction once and for all. All of that would have had to have been vacated as null and void, doesn’t matter that it is a federal criminal case. The Judge did not wanted that to happen and the fact that this corrupt judge would not make one decision on any of those motions is a clear sign that he could not just simply deny them like all of the others. It is clear judicial corruption and a sheer abuse of discretion by deciding to block Brian from appellate relief by not making a decision at all, sitting on the pending motions for almost a year now since they were filed. Here is a list of the uncontested, undisputed motions that the Judge and AUSA Ramaswamy hate so much that they want to ignore it on the record in the District Court:

#199 – MOTION entitled “Motion for Sanctions and to Vacate Judgment in Plaintiff’s/Respondent’s Favor” “Motion and Brief/Memorandum of Law in Support of Requesting the Honorable Court in this case Vacate Fraudulent Begotten Judgment or Judgments” filed by BRIAN DAVID HILL. Response to Motion due by 10/25/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement 1, # 2 Supplement 2, # 3 Exhibit 1, # 4 Exhibit 2, # 5 Envelope – Front and Back) (Civil Case number: 17CV1036) (Garland, Leah) (Entered: 10/04/2019)
#206 – MOTION entitled “Petitioner’s Second Motion for Sanctions and to Vacate Judgment that was in Plaintiff’s/Respondent’s Favor; Motion and Brief/Memorandum of Law in support of Requesting the Honorable Court in this case Vacate Fraudulent begotten Judgment or Judgments” filed by BRIAN DAVID HILL. Response to Motion due by 11/5/2019. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Supplement 1, # 4 Supplement 2, # 5 Supplement 3, # 6 Supplement 4, # 7 Envelope – Front and Back) (Garland, Leah) (Entered: 10/16/2019)
#217 – MOTION entitled “Request that the U.S. District Court Vacate Fraudulent Begotten Judgment, Vacate the Frauds upon the Court against Brian David Hill”, filed by BRIAN DAVID HILL re: 199 Motion. Response to Motion due by 12/2/2019 (Attachments: # 1 Envelope – Front and Back) (Garland, Leah) Modified on 11/12/2019 to correctly link document. (Garland, Leah) (Entered: 11/08/2019)
#222 – MOTION entitled “Petitioner’s third Motion for Sanctions, Motion for Default Judgment in 2255 case and to Vacate Judgment that was in Plaintiff/Respondent’s favor” filed by BRIAN DAVID HILL. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Supplement 1, # 12 Envelope – Front and Back) (Garland, Leah) (Entered: 11/21/2019)

Motions before and after these uncontested motions were either denied or granted, rarely granted if at all. Yet those four motions still sit pending on the docket without a decision ever have been made on it. The judge knows there is only one option pursuant to Local-Rule 7.3 and that is granting it, as a matter of law and as a matter of normal course. The judge will do everything he can to stall making any decisions on those motions because he knows it will end the wrongful conviction of Brian David Hill where it did not have to be done through writ of habeas corpus which is time barred except for actual innocence. Frauds by the federal prosecutor act as actual innocence since it proves that you cannot believe or trust any word, or of any evidence, or of any arguments from the lying federal prosecutor. It taints the entire litigation strategy from when the frauds had actually occurred. The DisHonorable Thomas David Schroeder knew there was no excuse or any way to deny those motions, he knew it, Brian knew it, both Renorda Pryor and Ramaswamy knew it, and the clerks knew it. The fourth circuit knew it and yet denied his writ of mandamus. Then later affirmed the revocation of Brian’s supervised release based upon bad circumstances and fraud. This is unbelievable from a supposed supervisory court of law.

Brian argued very important case law in his petition for rehearing. He argued that mandamus can be used to compel a judge to act upon motions where he/she had refused to act and ought to act. So Brian appropriately argued the correct case law from high courts, including the Virginia Supreme Court, and yet none of that mattered to any of the judges in the fourth circuit, and the entire petition for rehearing was denied. That was why Brian had filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court which was also denied and is seeking rehearing.

Brian told President Trump in a emergency letter that if certiorari is still denied after rehearing is denied, Brian plans on filing a writ of mandamus in the Supreme Court to compel the judge to act upon the pending motions that were uncontested and undisputed. If that fails, Brian requests a grant of a full pardon, unconditional pardon.

Anyways back to the fourth circuit corruption, they clearly lied to entirely throw out Brian’s petition for writ of mandamus and made similar lies or false statements in the opinion that was made on October 16, 2020.

Here are some lies we will expose on this blog.

Hill first asserts that proof beyond a reasonable doubt, not preponderance of the evidence, is the appropriate standard for revoking supervised release and further claims that a jury must make the relevant factual findings. However, we have previously determined “that the conditional liberty to which those under supervised release are subject entails the surrender of certain constitutional rights, including any right to have the alleged supervised release violation proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Ward, 770 F.3d 1090, 1099 (4th Cir. 2014); see Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694, 700 (2000) (holding that supervised release violation “need only be found by a judge under a preponderance of the evidence standard, not by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt”). Although Hill argues that the Supreme Court’s holding in United States v. Haymond, 139 S. Ct. 2369 (2019) (striking down 18 U.S.C. § 3583(k) (2018)) should be extended to all supervised release proceedings, we conclude that Haymond had no impact on Hill’s revocation sentence imposed under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (2018). Accordingly, because Ward remains good law, its holding forecloses Hill’s argument.

Sourced from https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4304407/257/united-states-v-hill/

This exact same writ panel who had made false claims before to dispose of the writ of mandamus because they disagreed with it or by whatever reason this blog writer cannot ascertain, so I take their claims with a grain of salt.

First of all, the Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States and the state Supreme Courts are considered c-equal unless a state Supreme Court was challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court. The original court certified as the third branch of government and that the original interpreter of the Constitution and how laws applies to cases and how laws and the constitution are interpreted in each given case law. The Supreme Court was the original court that had legal authority to make interpretations of constitutional law and statutes. However the lower courts were founded by a law passed by Congress, that would be the Judiciary Act of 1789. The Supreme Court could not handle the case load of federal cases all across the United States and with population increases it would put an impossible case-burden upon the only court in Washington, DC. So local and regional federal courthouses were built and created to even out the case loads and those courts would be given the same authority and power as the Supreme Court to interpret the laws and the constitution as well as how it applies to each and every individual case and circumstances. However it would always be enshrined that the Supreme Court would always have the original power and authority to interpret the constitution and federal laws and any state laws that may conflict with the federal supremacy clause. The Supreme Court still has the power to override a lower court decision which would be anywhere from an unfavorable decision from a state Supreme Court to an unfavorable decision in the federal court system after the appeal process had been exhausted.

The Supreme Court made case law precedent last year in regards to a supervised release revocation judgment deciding that even those who could be revoked of supervised release and given a term of imprisonment has also the right to a JURY TRIAL, yes the right to a jury trial due to the loss of a person’s liberty.

Only a jury, acting on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, may take a person’s liberty. That promise stands as one of the Constitution’s most vital protections against arbitrary government. Yet in this case a congressional statute compelled a federal judge to send a man to prison for a minimum of five years without empaneling a jury of his peers or requiring the government to prove his guilt be-yond a reasonable doubt. As applied here, we do not hesitate to hold that the statute violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.”

Cited from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-1672_5hek.pdf

The appeal brief by Attorney Kennedy asked the fourth circuit to create or modify existing case law in the fourth circuit to rule that the 2019 Supreme Court’s reasoning in regards to the right of a jury trial for supervised release revocation proceedings and the right to be acquitted upon showing reasonable doubt. The fourth circuit refused to take any of the Haymond decision into consideration and kept it out of the fourth circuit case law. Instead ruled that the older decisions of 2014, and 2000 of an older Supreme Court decision 20 years ago had been good law and therefore ruled that the judge was entirely in the right. So the fourth circuit rather ignore the Supreme Court and keep with their older more primitive case law depriving probationers of their constitutional rights including the right to a jury trial rather than make a decision that would be pro-constitutional-rights which would make Thomas Jefferson and George Washington proud.

That is the first sign of corruption that the fourth circuit wants to avoid anything favorable to the defense in a federal criminal case and rather attack Brian Hill relentlessly.

Then the second set of lies the fourth circuit Nazi Gestapo tribunal judges had made was that there was sufficient evidence that Brian was obscene in public, ignoring the carbon monoxide poisoning evidence and ignoring the writ of mandamus with actual evidence proving fraud upon the court. Obscene meaning engaging in an act that it appeals to or purports to the prurient interest in sex. However his attorney had AUSA Ramaswamy baffled about the whole thing when he argued that there was no clear intent that Brian Hill had ever attempted to engage in any type of obscene behavior because he was told by a man wearing a dark hoodie that his mother would be killed if Brian didn’t take his clothes off and take photos of himself. With Brian’s diagnosed Autism Spectrum Disorder, it would not be farfetched that somebody could have manipulated him to do that by verbal commands, even at night with the wrong kind of people lurking about. Later he admitted that he believed he may have hallucinated about the guy wearing the hoodie and revealed in court documents that he was diagnosed with a psychosis from a forensic psychiatrist that goes along with the statement of chimney expert Pete Compton who had made a written statement that Brian’s apartment was subject to carbon monoxide gas which anybody with common sense would understand that Brian would be subject to carbon monoxide poisoning just for being exposed to the gas even though Pete Compton is not a poison expert but was an expert in chimneys and how blocking the chimneys from airing out gas appliances using the flues can lead to carbon monoxide exposure. That would explain Brian’s only one time and nighttime indecent exposure of running down a deserted hiking trail butt naked until a car went by and saw him running. Brian never masturbated according to his testimony in court records, the police officer had no reason to believe that Brian was ever sexual but they still arrested him regardless, and did not believe he had Autism Spectrum Disorder according to information given from Brian’s family. The police hospitalized him and then taken him to the jail without ever testing him for drugs, substances, and neither any narcotics or gases. They pretty much were incompetent and could not admit to being incompetent in how they handled it in the city of Martinsville, so instead they the prosecution pushed to revoke his probation and ruin his life.

In fact a federal court civil lawsuit revealed that Martinsville Police Chief G. E. Cassady had refused to open up an envelope full of evidence explaining why Brian had been butt naked on a hiking trail at night on September 21, 2018. The evidence revealed that the envelope was never opened and was turned over the Commonwealth Attorney who would be Glen Andrew Hall, Esq., and then was turned over to Brian’s incompetent and ineffective defense counsel Matthew Clark who Brian sued as well because he was angry that this lawyer sat on evidence that could have caused Brian to have been found not guilty of indecent exposure in state court or cause the charge to be dropped, pure judicial corruption and police incompetence. Again, to ruin an innocent man once again and then revoke his federal probation on top of that. The entire case of indecent exposure and Brian’s pro se filings show a lack of intent, a lack of intent required by Virginia law [Price v. Commonwealth] to convict this man of his new state charge back in September 21, 2018.

Brian’s state case including his writ of habeas corpus and his petition for writ of error coram nobis is still currently pending on appeal in both the Supreme Court of Virginia and the Court of Appeals of Virginia, not the federal appeals court. Brian had been appointed a lawyer named John Jones, but this blog article is doing this research and publishing quickly and does not have the time to ask him for public comment regarding the pending appeal in the state criminal case.

The state courts may disagree by making a decision that Brian was not obscene and that he did not engage in any behavior that would appeal to the prurient interest in sex. The incompetence of the Martinsville Police Department by refusing to investigate the carbon monoxide proof and refusing to conduct drug testing of Brian Hill shows that they had lacked the appropriate ability to even attempt to understand Brian’s intent as to why he an autistic man with type one brittle diabetes was butt naked on a hiking trail in the middle of the night without an reasonable explanation that can be believed. He should have been mandated to being hospitalized and lab tested, drug tested at best and blood drawn as evidence at worst for further forensic analysis. When a guy is diagnosed a month later by Piedmont Community Services forensic psychiatrist to exhibiting a form of delusion or psychosis would back the National Institute of Health’s criteria of carbon monoxide poisoning symptoms. One would be hallucinations which would explain why the police couldn’t make sense of Brian’s claims and put on record that a “black man in a hoodie” could not be located. The diagnosis of psychosis independently produced by Dr. Conrad Daum a month after he was arrested. Then the hospital records published on PACER and courtlistener show that Brian had seriously high resting blood pulse before his arrest while at the Sovah Hospital of Martinsville, which would indicate evidence of sinus tachycardia that is also evidence of fulfilling yet another documented symptom of carbon monoxide poisoning. Brian has enough evidence to convince the media or even the court of public opinion that he was innocent of indecent exposure and has no serial history of that type of behavior. That behavior had happened right around the time when Brian had allegedly suffered with carbon monoxide for many months according to his words and his family. That is why this blog still defends Brian despite his new 2018th charge, because we do not believe he is a danger to society and no evidence has ever been shown proving that. The indecent exposure can be caused by drugs including slipping of drugs into drink beverages by an unknown assailant. Those type incidents can also be caused by gasses and even overdosing of alcohol. The facts that Brian attempted to demonstrate both in federal and state court before being revoked of probation, shows that Brian clearly could not have shown any criminal intent as of September 21, 2018. There is no evidence of criminal intent required by Virginia case law of obscenity. That was what Brian’s lawyer Attorney Kennedy had argued in his brief, and his appellate reply brief admitted that the U.S. attorney assistant Ramaswamy did not dispute that they had no evidence of Brian engaging in any kind of remarks or behavior that would appeal to the prurient interest in sex. That proves the corruption of the fourth circuit court of appeals, because even the government lawyer did not dispute that there was NO EVIDENCE of Brian intending to be obscene in the middle of the night after experiencing some kind of psychosis or hallucination which is symptoms of potential carbon monoxide poisoning when evidence of this was found by Brian’s family and by Pete Compton according to court documents.

The district court did not hear, however, any evidence of Appellant having his dominant theme, or purpose being an appeal to the prurient interest in sex. For example, the government does not dispute that there was no evidence of Appellant making any sexual remarks, being aroused, masturbating, or enjoying his conduct, sexually or otherwise. If a person was purposing to expose himself in public because he or she found it sexually arousing, it would be logical that he or she would pick a place and time where he or she would expect to encounter lots of members of the public. Appellant did not do that. Rather, he was running around between midnight and 2:00 a.m. and the witnesses to his nudity were few. Hence, the statements Appellant made to police and his conduct both indicate that, in the light most favorable to the government, (1) he was naked in public while having a psychiatric episode 5, but (2) without the intent necessary to commit indecent exposure under Virginia law.”

Citing reply brief of Appellant from Brian’s lawyer: https://archive.org/download/HillvUSA/Appeal-19-4758-Document-30.pdf

Either it was carbon monoxide or he was drugged and the Martinsville Police were idiots enough not to conduct any laboratory tests. Even if they do not have to be required to do such tests under law, it is still incompetent to see a man acting weird like Brian had done and not think that he was under the influence of some kind of drug or substance that may have caused his irrational behavior at night. Prior to that incident, they never seen him, never suspected of doing such behavior all of his life, and then out of the blue here is Brian running down a trail butt naked. Anybody should have done laboratory tests and drug tests, that should have been automatic. That should have been done. Likely Brian never would have refused a drug test with the things he was claiming to police.

In fact many years ago somebody had attempted to have drugged Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton after they had left working for Infowars.com. See they could have also run around butt naked at night in a public place like Brian had done but maybe Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton did not get caught, just making a theory here and there is no evidence of Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton ever doing such conduct, just saying a theory example here for the sake of the argument. Maybe the police there in Texas would have been more competent and have done drug tests if they were were caught out in the middle of the night butt naked like Brian was. The police would have had the evidence and never would have charged them with indecent exposure. It is through incompetence of Martinsville Police that Brian’s probation was revoked and the truth can never be fully investigated because of such clear incompetence, idiots, and those that do not understand when somebody may have been drugged or may have been spiked with carbon monoxide.

Anyways so the fourth circuit was in the wrong for making the obscene finding since even the U.S. attorney did not dispute Brian having no evidence of obscenity in regards to his nighttime “psychiatric episode” as his own lawyer had put it, I believe he is right. Carbon monoxide can make people see things that aren’t there and hear things that aren’t there. The police clearly should have made such determinations before ruining his life and subjecting him to extreme legal terrorism by the DisHonorable Thomas David Schroeder and by the gestapo fourth circuit corrupt judges from hell.

The last piece of the corruption by the fourth circuit U.S. Court of Appeals is the fact that they ruled that the judge was acting appropriate in denying Brian’s motion for a continuance so that Brian could complete his trial de novo in the state court system as was Brian’s constitutional right when accused of violating a state criminal law. Brian has the right to prove his innocence.

On the probation violation hearing set in his federal district dated Dec 26, 2018, Brian appeared before the Honorable Magistrate Judge Robert S. Ballou of Roanoke, VA, yes the same one who denied Brian’s motions back during the FOIA lawsuit, I heard from somebody that during that hearing this Magistrate judge actually said that Brian has a constitutional right to “trial de novo” in the state court before the final disposition of the federal supervised release violation. That same judge actually made a statement that contradicts what the fourth circuit is now claiming. The fourth circuit claims as though that Brian has no right to appear before a state criminal trial to prove whether or not he was guilty of indecent exposure before revoking his federal supervised release probation. That makes no sense as it is an unconstitutional usurpation of power by the fourth circuit. Brian’s right to prove his innocence and carbon monoxide poisoning to his state criminal charge should have been protected by the federal courts. When federal judges tell Brian of his “right” to “trial de novo” and legal scholars like Eric Clark of Kansas, all agree about the right to a “trial de novo” before the decision on whether revocation and maximum imprisonment is warranted, that should have been also upheld by Judge Schroeder.

The evidence is clear from the NAZI Fourth-circuit gestapo opinion dated September 16, 2020, that they have no respect for the state court process and want to crap on top of Brian and his whole family. This corrupt court of appeals is basically allowing a federal court to throw an innocent man in federal prison in Kentucky without having the right to face a jury trial in his state criminal case for the very allegations that had triggered the revocation in the first place. The fourth NAZI circuit court was in favor of the judge “rejected the alternative explanations that Hill offered to excuse his conduct.” These judges sound very biased towards Schroeder and unsympathetic to any evidence or witnesses offered including Pete Compton the chimney guy. Maybe they don’t like the opinions of this blog but the blog posts are not of Brian’s and a court should not retaliate against Brian for what is being posted on this blog, they are of the writer’s viewpoints of this blog and of viewpoint’s of his family writes on this blog too. This circuit is acting crazy and made unreasonable opinions here. Carbon monoxide is not something to play around with, maybe if these corrupt judges had all experienced months of exposure to carbon monoxide gas, maybe they’d understand and would have made a fair and unbiased decision. However they could care less and act as though they are psychopaths of the judiciary. This judge ignored evidence, refused to ask the police whether or not they had read the letter Brian had written to the police chief G. E. Cassady explaining why he was engaging in the accused conduct. They ignored it all, ignored all evidence and witnesses favorable to Brian to give him 9 months of imprisonment, and the fourth circuit defended it all and ignored the Supreme Court cases on top of that.

It is clear that this federal appeals court is engag9ing in serious lying, corruption, and abuses of power, and they are openly engaging in a treasonous rebellion against the Supreme Court of the United States. Brian had stated that in his petition for rehearing in the Supreme Court, the “Fourth Circuit” is being allowed to rebel against the Supreme Court and said in an earlier filing that the District Court is allowed to engage in a civil war against the Supreme Court or precedential case law.

Like if the District Court or an Appellate Court made a decision that contradicts a past Supreme Court decision which creates an activism or rebellion against this Court and causes a Court to act independently creating an adverse legal jurisprudence to this court. It creates a rebellion or confederacy against this Supreme Court where its case law is no longer respected when it favors making decisions that conflict with the decisions of this court

cited: https://justiceforuswgo.files.wordpress.com/2020/10/first-us-supreme-court-petition-for-rehearing-complete.pdf

This may be considered pre-civil-war talk. This is the kind of talk that usually starts before an American Revolution like in 1776 or civil war. When there is talk that courts no longer respect the constitution or case law of the highest court in the United States. Brian is arguing that the lower courts are engaging in civil war type disobedience and that they no longer respect the decisions of the Supreme Court because they are not being enforced in the lower courts anymore. This is dangerous for our constitutional republic.

It is time for this evidence to be turned over to President Trump and the U.S. military to make a determination whether the lower courts and judges are acting against the constitution and against the Supreme Court, because of these facts they are being demonstrated then we are facing high treason of epic proportions by the highest officers of the district courts and appellate courts.

The same appellate court that ruled Brian was being obscene had known that there was omissions in the transcript, and allowing the federal judge and his court reporter to doctor transcripts AT WILL. The omissions according to four filed affidavits had concluded that the police officer Robert Jones of Martinsville Police had admitted under oath that Brian had not engaged in obscene behavior when his attorney Renorda Pryor had asked the witness if Brian was being obscene. Brian argued that the question and answer was omitted from the transcript and appealed to the fourth circuit about this issue after Judge Schroeder had denied his motion asking for correction to the transcript. They affirmed the district court and allowed the judge to get away with omitting information that could have been used to further show that Brian did not engage in obscene behavior in public on September 21, 2018. This is judicial corruption in both the district court and appeal court. You can’t fight a corrupt system in a corrupt system

Donald Trump must have this matter investigated thoroughly by the DOJ and FBI and maybe it is time for the U.S. military and Green Berets [aka United States Army Special Forces] to arrest these corrupt federal appellate court judges and Judge Schroeder for high treason and obstruction of justice for allowing the alteration and disappearance of federal court documents to satisfy the corrupt desires of Judge Schroeder to imprison and repeatedly punish and bully an autistic man who is innocent of indecent exposure and of his original federal conviction due to the frauds upon the court. Maybe it is time for highly treasonous Judge Schroeder to face a military tribunal for high treason as well as the appellate court judges of the fourth circuit in Richmond, Virginia for high treason.