The David Knight Show January 18, 2021 MIRROR

There is no fraud. You still have the right of free speech and they have the right of property as their platform is product of their efforts. You have no right to impose your will upon their property. And there is no tourtious interference and it is obvious David has no clue what that entails.
⁣For tortious interference with a contractual relationship:
1) Existence of a binding contract favorable to plaintiff.

2) Defendant's knowledge of the contract.

3) Defendant's intentional and unjustified procurement of the contract's breach.

4) Damage to plaintiff as a proximate result.
The only thing that could be proven in court would be item 2. But let's say by some miracle the opposing lawyer was asleep throught this whole thing, your feelings do not count as damage, immediate dismissal and the lawyer wakes up and demands costs.

The coup document of 1787 did not flow from the Declaration of Independence but in spite of it. The Declaration of Independence states in paragraph two: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,..."



Immediately upon the declaration being accepted, the elietist in the thirteen colonies drew up constitutions declaring themselves the control, government, individual sovereign states and formed a confederation for their mutual protection from a far superior force, England. In 1787, certain cretions held a secret meeting in Philadelphia where of the 77 delegates, only thirty nine delegates remained and signed including Hamilton that had no authority as the New York delegates withdrew saying they wanted nothing to do with it.
So tell me, where is this consent? Only Rhode Island put it to a popular vote and it lost.


"⁣The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago." Lysander Spooner, "No Treason, No. VI, Constitution of No Authority:

This just keeps getting dumber and dumber. No one has a right to supercede another's rights and the coup document of 1787 does not say anything about what is trying to be implied by a whole host of ignorant people. First off, the coup document is an implied power document where if the power is not implied, it doesn't exist unless you have gone to law school and become truly ignorant. Second, the Bill of Rights, written by people that did not want it to exist, is a document written in a negative state as a reminder what could not be done by the government because as can be seen the implied powers don't mean any thing. That does not apply to private transactions where one party does not have to deal with the other if they don't like whatever, it's call free enterprise. Only communist, collective, thinking would try to imply otherwise.

Now, an interesting aspect.These corporations are fictional entities of a fictional entity, the government. Because they are granted special privileges by charter, then a writ of quo warranto could be used to challenge that charter. Quo warranto literally means by what warrant, or what authority allows their operation. If their corporate charter is pulled, they cease to exist, puff, gone, are no more. They may continue to operate but the corporate umbrella has now vanished and all the executives are personally responsible for their action and need to be sued in their persons as the company has no standing as a separate entity.

Some day perhaps but I doubt it, David will learn that constitutions do not make you free but are to enslave you.

this fellow is authentic, ⁣AlexJones is ⁣disingenuous.