20201212-Filed-Complaint.Pdf
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Case 2:20-cv-06260 Document 1 Filed 12/11/20 Page 1 of 179 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Sally Loveland, a California Resident, § CIVIL ACTION: Sharon Cheatle, a Florida Resident, § Janine Cortese, a North Carolina Resident, § Tyler Boyle, a Pennsylvania Resident, and § (1) FIRST, FOURTH, FIFTH AND Steve McCann, a Pennsylvania Resident § FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS § TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION § (Bivens action); § (2&3) SHERMAN ACT § 2; § CLAYTON ACT § 4; § (4) RICO FRAUD (18 U.S.C. § 1962); Plaintiffs § (5) DEFAMATION; v. § (6) BREACH OF CONTRACT; § (7) PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL; and FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware corporation, § (8) DECLARATORY RELIEF MARK ZUCKERBERG, a California resident, § FACTCHECK.ORG, a Pennsylvania corporation, § POYNTER INSTITUTE, a Florida corporation, § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED LEAD STORIES LLC, Colorado company, § and DOES 1-20, Defendants. § VERIFIED COMPLAINT Case 2:20-cv-06260 Document 1 Filed 12/11/20 Page 2 of 179 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………… ………4 JURISDICTION AND VENUE…………………………………………………….………… ..9 PARTIES………………………………...……………………………………………………...10 ALLEGATIONS……………………………………………………………………………..…14 Facebook establishes a monopoly on the public square…………………………………….14 Facebook acquires access to user content through terms of service that are made possible by its monopoly and through a scheme of concealing the material terms of its financial arrangement with Plaintiffs and users……………………….17 Facebook uses its monopoly to surveil users and seize total dominion over the creation, storage, and access of content on its platform……………………………………..21 Defendant Facebook works to garner favor with its governmental overseers……………….24 Facebook expands “curation” protocols that promote Mandatory Vaccine Policy, and the COVID-19 pandemic response became a pretext to promote new vaccines, new drugs and to suppress free expression…………………………………………………..25 Defendant’s violated Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights to discuss the existence of off-patent prophylaxis and treatments on the public square and to spotlight the systemic corruption and ineffectual pandemic response…………………………………27 DEFENDANT’S SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD Overview of Pre-Pandemic Censorship Conditions Regarding Vaccines Policy and Defendant’s Agency with the Government………………………………………………32 To curry favor with its Government Overseers, Facebook expands its Vaccine Censorship program into a Pandemic Vaccines and New Drugs program………………46 In January 2020, HCQ is a cheap, available drug that has safely treated 800 million people over 65 years under FDA approval that infectious diseases experts deem to be efficacious as a prophylaxis and cure for the emerging new Coronavirus (COVID-19) …………………...…46 COVID-19………………………………………………………..46 Hydroxychloroquine (“HCQ”)……………………………...……48 2 Case 2:20-cv-06260 Document 1 Filed 12/11/20 Page 3 of 179 How did HCQ become a dangerous drug in less than a year with a laundry list of newly emerging and dangerous side effect……………………………………55 Plaintiffs hoped to use the social network to share information, and potentially life-saving health information with fellow Americans………...…….58 Facebook, as an agent of government, and to protect its Special Immunities, ensured Plaintiffs could not collaborate and share information, and kept lifesaving “off patent” treatments from Americans…………………………..…60 While “off-patent” HCQ is tragically ignored, “on-patent” Remdesivir gets attention unwarranted by any efficaciousness claims……………………………………………60 The New England Journal of Medicine Rushes to Publish a Remdesivir “study” Based on One Remdesivir Patient, a French Study Vanishes, and NIH Rushes Remdesivir Trials………………………………….…………….61 Lackluster China Remdesivir Studies Suspended or Aborted Reducing Statistical Power………………………………………62 Remdesivir Trials Flop, yet Top CDC Officials Focus on Remdesivir and Vaccines with No Mention of HCQ……………63 Facebook Agrees to an Official Truth Policy to Appease its Government Overseers ………………………………………….65 HCQ was Universally Cited as a Treatment Protocol until Supported by President Trump……………………………….…68 President Trump Raises Official Concerns about WHO……..…75 MEANS AND METHODS OF DEFENDANT’S MONOPLOIZATION SCHEME AND SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD AND DEFAME PLAINTIFFS………………………………….108 DEFENDANTS FALSELY DISPARAGE PLAINTIFFS AND HAN THROUGH WARNING LABELS AND MATERIALLY DECEPTIVE USE OF FACT CHECKERS AND FALSELY BRANDING POSTS………………………………………………………………………...…116 CAUSES OF ACTION…………………………………………………………………………146 PRAYER FOR RELIEF……………………………………………………………………..…178 VERIFICATION…………………………………………………………………………….…179 3 Case 2:20-cv-06260 Document 1 Filed 12/11/20 Page 4 of 179 I. INTRODUCTION 1. Sally Loveland, Sharon Cheatle, Janine Cortese, Tyler Boyle, and Steven McCann, by and through their undersigned attorney, sue Defendants Facebook, Inc., Mark Zuckerberg, Factcheck.Org, Poynter Institute, Lead Stories LLC and Does 1-20, and for its Complaint alleges on personal information as to itself and on information and belief as to all other things. 2. Plaintiffs were drawn together because of their common interest in pharmaceutical solutions like hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) that could end the COVID-19 pandemic in days or weeks. Plaintiffs sue Defendants for their deliberate use of suppression, censorship and “known lies” to infringe on Plaintiffs’ Constitutional rights in agency with the U.S. government. Defendants have irreparably damaged Plaintiffs sacred obligations to fulfill their duty as Americans to share important health care information with their fellow citizens THAT COULD HAVE PREVENTED MANY DEATHS. Treatments beginning at the earliest stage of COVID-19 infection were preempted by Facebook’s “fact checkers” preventing important life-saving information from getting to Americans including physicians, nurses and health care workers, and their elected representatives. Sadly, censorship is so comprehensive and withering, that Plaintiffs are forced to create an insuppressible record, in a protected federal court docket, in the Cradle of Liberty, in this very unusual case, so that it may be able to be seen and shared with other Americans. 3. This is a case about the most powerful monopoly on Earth, Facebook, which acquired its monopoly over the American public square through fraud and artifice by offering “free” services that were not free in any sense. All Facebook users were adversely impacted on 4 Case 2:20-cv-06260 Document 1 Filed 12/11/20 Page 5 of 179 October 1, 2020, when Facebook breached its contracts and claimed total dominion over their users’ content and an unfettered right to separate users from and to confiscate their content. 4. Defendant Facebook monopolized the public square as it acquired total dominion over users’ content. It surveilled users while they were not using Facebook and imposed speech codes on the public square in violation of the Constitutional rights of its users. The Defendants monitored, censored and libelously branded Plaintiffs as purveyors of false, misleading and dangerous information to curry favor with politicians who were positioned to protect Facebook’s monopoly, immunities, anti-competitive position and content dominion, most notably, its monopoly and its continued immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (hereinafter sometimes referred to interchangeably as “Special Immunities”) 5. Facebook branded Plaintiffs’ life-saving informational posts false, curating content and differences of reasonable opinions, and reframing issues in deceptive ways to benefit their “government overseers,”, 1 who would benefit if Facebook diverted Americans to their own 1 Plaintiffs include those who support and don’t support President Trump politically, but share the experience of having promoted an idea that was deemed invalid or banned by the Defendants because of its subsequent association with President Trump. “Government overseers” as used throughout includes elected Congressional representatives, the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and their agents and representatives, who adopted positions seen by commentators as being opposite of President Trump. Plaintiffs have no position regarding this other than Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine and other early treatments can 5 Case 2:20-cv-06260 Document 1 Filed 12/11/20 Page 6 of 179 brand of “government approved” opinions that they sought to promote. To appease these government overseers, Facebook destroyed the public square and stripped Plaintiffs of their Constitutional Rights while converting itself to a publisher, or an “information content provider” under Section 230(f)(3). 2 Through in house “mods” that included artificial intelligence moderators, and with a constellation of Orwellian “factcheckers,” including co-defendants Factcheck.Org, Poynter Institute, and Lead Stories LLC, Facebook suppressed and censored life-saving information from being discussed and shared while it published its own erroneous false information as an “information content provider.” 6. Our system of government is premised on an informed citizenry. Nowhere did the Constitutional Framers outsource from local citizens the job of determining “the truth” to government overseers. Nor did the Constitution outsource to government overseers authority to define the parameters of objective truth or outsource control over the public square to private agents like the Defendants, to enforce government “official” or “approved”