1 min 5 second intro by researcher:
[Following update excerpted from Digital Brief: Law and Images, with link to complete document below]
Section 2(f) of this overview of law and facts features examples of four general tools of personal and professional character murder. But in recent weeks, presumptive defendants and their minions in the coming civil defamation action against the Episcopal Church / LGBT Alliance appear to have grown more aggressive in their dealings with this researcher and the work that he produces and releases. In addition to apparently obliterating before they can ever reach their destinations electronic communications that are clearly marked as “Confidential Privileged Communications” under both Attorney-Client Privilege and the Attorney Work Product Doctrine – new social media content from this lawyer is ever more quickly killed in the womb. But if that doesn’t work and that content manages to breathe life for even a moment, it’s killed as it exits the birth canal.
Presumptive plaintiff has also been dispatched without cause from at least one Facebook group whose members regularly and significantly interacted with content intended for past and present U.S. Marines and those who support them. But data received from Facebook 14 Feb 2019 have been sanitized to remove all references to this lawyer ever having been in the group to begin with. Thank God for screenshots.
As images in part 2 of this digital memo reveal, presumptive defendants from, inter alia, as many as 750 Episcopal Churches that have formally committed themselves to “welcome and affirm” “ALL SEXUAL ORIENTATIONS, GENDER IDENTITIES, AND GENDER EXPRESSIONS,” have colluded through various means to murder, professionally and personally, the American lawyer who authored a 2004 article that advocated amending the U.S. Constitution to define “marriage” as a union only between one man and one woman. Recent data received from Facebook reveal that one of those methods is to flagrantly lie to lawyer’s national security/defense/veterans audience that plaintiff followed and has now stopped following pages that plaintiff never would have followed in the first place and which are inconsistent with everything lawyer has ever produced or participated in, These include pages such as “resist.bot” and pages dedicated to those whose interests include aggressively waging political war in pursuit of a socialist agenda.