🇺🇸JenniferCatherine🇺🇸

Our Plandemic Research In March 2020 Summarized in a One-Minute Recreation With All The Real People That Were Part Of That Historic Declaration Of "This Is A Live Exercise". In reality, we were locked down on the Potomac for 18 days, but it made for great research.

Here is the YouTube Class Action for protecting Fauci et al with selective censorship. drive.google.com/file/d/1w4Y… UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE WEBB SWEIGERT, YOUTUBE CREATOR 1 through YOUTUBE CREATOR 100, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. GOOGLE LLC; YOUTUBE, LLC; DOES 1–100, including responsible officers, executives, managers, and other persons whose identities and roles will be determined through discovery, Defendants. Case No. __________ CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiffs George Webb Sweigert and YouTube Creator Plaintiffs 1 through 100 (“Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of a proposed class of similarly situated creators, allege as follows. I. INTRODUCTION 1. This action concerns one of the largest repositories of independently produced documentary, journalistic, scientific, educational, musical, and historical material in modern history: YouTube. 2. Millions of creators have invested years of labor and substantial financial resources producing material for the YouTube platform. 3. Those creators have supplied Google and YouTube with content, audience engagement, advertising inventory, data, subscriptions, goodwill, and market value. 4. In return, creators reasonably expect that published rules governing their participation will be administered in accordance with the parties’ contractual obligations and applicable law. 5. This action challenges what Plaintiffs allege was a pattern of arbitrary, inconsistent, discriminatory, and/or bad-faith enforcement against particular creators and categories of reporting. 6. Plaintiffs do not ask this Court to determine at the pleading stage whether every proposition expressed in every removed video was correct. 7. Nor does this action depend upon proving that every opinion expressed by Plaintiffs ultimately proves correct. 8. The central question is different: Did Defendants apply their contractual rules and enforcement procedures lawfully and in good faith, or did they selectively eliminate creators and historically valuable reporting based upon viewpoint or undisclosed criteria while representing that enforcement was governed by published standards? II. THE AUGUST 20, 2026 TERMINATION 9. Plaintiff George Webb Sweigert is an independent journalist and creator who, over a period of years, used YouTube to publish thousands of videos. 10. Sweigert’s archive included substantial amounts of original, on-location reporting rather than merely commentary concerning material produced by others. 11. On or about August 20, 2026, YouTube terminated and/or disabled Sweigert’s channel and rendered thousands of his videos unavailable through the channel. 12. The affected archive allegedly included thousands of videos constituting on-site reporting, research, interviews, citizen-science projects, educational projects, music, cultural material, and other original works. 13. Among the material rendered unavailable were videos concerning Sweigert’s reporting surrounding January 6, 2021. 14. The archive also contained reporting concerning the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania. 15. It contained reporting and investigation concerning the death of Suchir Balaji. 16. It contained reporting concerning the assassination of Charlie Kirk. 17. It contained reporting concerning the origins of SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus research, laboratory research, government pandemic preparedness programs, universities, federal agencies, and military pandemic exercises. 18. Plaintiffs contend that much of this material constituted journalism, documentary reporting, commentary, scientific discussion, investigation, or public-interest reporting. III. DESTRUCTION OF UNRELATED EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL MATERIAL 19. The consequences extended far beyond politically controversial videos. 20. Termination XV. INJUNCTIVE AND EQUITABLE RELIEF

I think Swalwell getting his devices seized triggered this. He carried an encrypted Blackberry. The whole covert network Schiff is running comes down if they get one device.

LOL, apparently, now, five and a half years later, there were orange hats at J6 now because Steve Baker said so on Tucker. He wasn't there to film trying to incriminate Trump, but now he knows they were there.

ISIS plot and Trump Supporter murder just one of eight stories we are working on here in San Diego.

Rothschild NSA and MI6 stalkers coming out of the woodwork since the Iran Manhattan Project Spy arrest in Newport Beach.

Hanta Claws Is Coming To Town teapawt.org/i/broadcasts/1XxygmeRk…

We Got It Right Day Four - Did Blackjack Save Kent? teapawt.org/i/broadcasts/1nGnRYgjE…

Drop The Sticks, Joe Kent And Candace teapawt.org/i/broadcasts/1qGvvkBQm…

Kash Patel takedown of Iranian arms network in Los Angeles last night. Great work Kash

Live From The Danny Casolaro Breakfast Bar teapawt.org/i/broadcasts/1MJgNgMwM…

Joe Kent "Open Roof" CIA signature at Butler, Joe Kent CIA signature at UVU

The Grassley March 15th 2026 Memo teapawt.org/i/broadcasts/1vJpPrwnP…

Chasing The Joe Kent Assassination Server teapawt.org/i/broadcasts/1qKDzPaVP…

Celebrating three years of our journalists riding the rails to get to the bottom of the CIA's Arctic Frost - culminating in Senator Ted Cruz, a target of Arctic Frost, tap dancing on Joe Kent's head today.