ALERT: Read the very documents filed but not publicly listed in PDF Format on the Supreme Court’s docket page. What is SCOTUS not wanting publicly listed??? Declaration-support-Motion-review-disqualification.pdf – Declaration in support of Motion for Review and Disqualification (PDF). Read the letter begging the Clerk to file publicly in pdf format the filings, they were very afraid that they couldn’t file them publicly on the docket page. Did John Roberts put pressure on them???

Author: Stanley Bolten

The U.S. Supreme Court quickly docketed the Petition for Rehearing in the blackmail scheme case (case no. 22-6123) without waiting in the two-day waiting period for the mail room, the case involving Chief Justice John Roberts but did not publicly docket the “Motion for Review and Disqualification” because it contained a very interesting unsworn Declaration about the new information alleged from Pete Santilli about Chief Justice Roberts, and about Evan Neumann corroborating the claims made in one of the filed pleadings in the blackmail scheme case. Pete Santilli even said that there was evidence Chief Justice John Roberts visited 300+ child porn/kiddie porn websites, according to his source or sources. Brian also filed emergency motions asking for recusal of John Roberts for allegedly being blackmailed, which were ignored by Roberts. Normally filings are not filed in the Clerk’s office until after the two-day mail waiting period unless an emergency situation arises where they need to file the pleadings in the mailing sooner than the 2-day waiting period. The proof it was filed that same day is in the USPS electronic return receipt. Brian D. Hill the petition filer is formerly of USWGO Alternative News.

The petition for rehearing has definitely been filed and the docket screenshot will be shown next after a screenshot of the filed petition. Then this article will show you what the Deputy Clerk Clayton Higgins was afraid to publicly add to the docket on the docket page, the further evidence against Chief Justice Roberts. About Evan Neumann corroborating the claims made in Brian’s filing. They are very scared of this getting out, they are VERY AFRAID. Wonder why???

See the Feb 03 2023 entry, NO LINKS, haha, they are definitely afraid of what was in those filings. So I will show you the very filings they were afraid to list publicly on the docket page, they did accepted Brian’s motion for review and disqualification (the entry proves that) as well as the declaration, but they were not keen on uploading it on the docket page. Also review over the letter to the Clerk asking to file them publicly on the docket in PDF format and in their entirety. I guess they were afraid to do so or pressure was put on them to not do so. Very interesting indeed.

– Declaration-support-Motion-review-disqualification.pdf – Declaration in support of Motion for Review and Disqualification.
– Letter to Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court – January 31, 2022(2).pdf – Letter to Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States, dated January 31, 2023 (date in file-name does not reflect the correct date in the letter filing, just to warn those who download this file, just a mere technical goof in the pdf file name).
– Motion-review-disqualification.pdf – Motion for Review and Disqualification

See what SCOTUS was afraid of publicly listing:

See page 1:

Page 1 of Declaration.

See page 5:

Page 5 of Declaration.

See page 6:

Page 6 of Declaration.

See page 7:

Page 7 of Declaration.

See page 8:

Page 8 of Declaration.

See page 9:

Page 9 of Declaration.

See page 33:

Page 33 of Declaration which is a printout of an article attached to Declaration.

See page 34:

Page 34 of Declaration which is a printout of an article attached to Declaration.

See page 35:

Page 35 of Declaration which is a printout of an article attached to Declaration.

What is the U.S. Supreme Court trying to hide here, why were they afraid to publicly list on the docket page the Declaration of Brian David Hill under penalty of perjury???