Author: Stanley Bolten
ALERT: Found this out today: Exclusive: BREAKING: The U.S. Supreme Court accepted the Raland Brunson case, the Supremes accepted the case (Source is redacted to protect source) – Justice for Brian D. Hill of USWGO Alternative News (God prevails, patriots prevail)
Today is the conference day for the U.S. Supreme Court on January 6, 2023. John Roberts will now be confronted with an EMERGENCY MOTION requesting recusal (attached evidence) of Chief Justice John Roberts to all nine justices with allegations from Attorney L. Lin Wood (allegations made two years ago on Twitter). The entire case in the U.S. Supreme Court is regarding a request for a Special Master to review over alleged blackmail videos of judges and officials engaging in acts of rape and murder of a child on video tapes. The blackmail scheme is allegedly from U.S. Intelligence agencies of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), as well as MOSSAD, British MI6, and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), according to what was alleged by Attorney Wood. The case was by Brian D. Hill, the former news reporter of USWGO Alternative News at uswgo.com. The case can be accessed here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-6123.html (Case no. 22-6123). John Roberts was given an opportunity by an emergency application requesting voluntary recusal for having a conflict of interest due to having a personal interest in the outcome of the blackmail scheme case. He has refused to recuse himself and may try to fight to have SCOTUS to deny Writ of Certiorari, case no 22-6123. If he does then John Roberts has violated the law, violated 28 U.S. Code § 455 – Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge.
The Raland Brunson case will also be discussed at the conference today as well. This case was involving the fact that Congress did not do their constitutional duty to prevent foreign influence in the American elections inside the United States of America. Brought out the fact that the Director of Intelligence warned that China hacked into the voting machines, and therefore Congress has an obligation under their oaths of office to investigate the foreign election interference before certifying the election results from the electors. Brian Hill did file a letter in support of Raland Brunson’s case in the event that his case requesting Writ of Certiorari is denied. His websites can be accessed at: https://ralandbrunson.com/ and https://7discoveries.com/. That case is challenging the “sovereign immunity” of Congress where courts are not legally allowed to sue any government official who has sovereign immunity. Depending on that immunity, they may not be sued or charged with any crime even if they commit a crime, they can get away with it unless that immunity is taken away. Meaning that a person cannot be held legally liable for any wrongdoing if they have any legal immunity. Raland Brunson argued in his petition that it is an “act of war” and is treason to not protect the American citizens from a foreign government/country influencing our elections who has a vested interest in working against the United States of America. Hope I didn’t interpret his arguments too much away from what he may mean, but I heard enough online interviews of shows with Loy Brunson to understand what Raland was arguing in his petition, and what he was trying to do to protect the United States of America by doing all of this legal work.
If John Roberts is blackmailed with all of the alleged evidence against him, he cannot be charged with child rape or viewing child pornography because he has sovereign immunity. Which of course is wrong, the U.S. Constitution is supposed to protect the American people from the U.S. Government, not protect the U.S. Government from being held accountable by the American people. If Chief Justice Roberts is blackmailed as Attorney Lin Wood had claimed, as well as the statements by Pete Santilli regarding James Baker and evidence of John Roberts accessing a child porn site, then he is compromised and will do whatever the blackmailers want him to do. John Roberts will likely be directed by the blackmailers to target the Raland Brunson case, he will try to sabotage that case as well as sabotage the case of Brian Hill v. United States pending case in the Supreme Court to protect his own personal interests. He will do this even if it is criminally wrong, morally wrong, and unconstitutional. John Roberts is above the law when he can freely watch child porn, download child porn, and rape kids on video tapes. For now, he is above the law, until he is arrested and tried for crimes against humanity as well as HIGH TREASON. It is a crime against humanity to rape a child. As Attorney Lin Wood had said, it is a crime against humanity. Hopefully I am quoting Lin Wood correctly here. If these individuals who are blackmailed do not play ball, they could be stripped of their sovereign immunity. Then the corporate media would release the information about the blackmail material to ruin that individual and disgrace the entire family of that individual. Brian Hill had been a victim of judicial corruption, and this other issue of federal judges going to these illegal porn sites to be blackmailed with that crime, that would explain much as to why justice cannot be obtained by Brian no matter how hard he fights in the corrupt legal system. Brian was almost fully pardoned by former President Donald Trump thanks to Roger Stone receiving an affidavit of Brian’s innocence and explaining why he was not able to be acquitted due to the judicial corruption.
The website cultstate.com which was named in the text of the encryption password of the alleged blackmail videos because Attorney Lin Wood was given this encryption password by his source or sources, was under Deep State attacks a few weeks ago, and was under keyword warrant attacks attempting to have the Feds access the emails of Patrick Ryan of cultstate.com.
There is information coming forth that Pete Santilli spoke on his show of evidence which may surface at some point about federal judges viewing child pornography websites and were caught doing it, and yet none of them ever faced any criminal charges for viewing child pornography (likely while their webcams were recording them viewing the child porn sites, I am assuming). Also mentioned about John Roberts.
Video will come soon and be posted here. He also said it was brought up in federal court somewhere, I am not sure. When and if I find those case files they will be brought out here to further expose John Roberts.
Here is the clip: https://archive.org/details/james-baker-porn-sites-judges
[archiveorg james-baker-porn-sites-judges width=640 height=480 frameborder=0 webkitallowfullscreen=true mozallowfullscreen=true]
Why would Lin Wood risk his career of over 40 years of law-work to talk about something heinous like children being raped and murdered for usage as blackmail???