Contrary to the longstanding judgment against properly investigating and arresting Gail Burstyn and her confederates the use of namesakes does not inherently prove the innocence of those whose names were used.  While it is possible to affirm a strong bias in defense of Clint Eastwood this does not explain the insane cruelty of how I was mutilated and tortured without review at a time when I was actually defending Reagan.  The claim that it is too dangerous to name the accused is therefore highjinxed by the idea of even greater jeopardy not to, which obviously shows why witness and research should not be tampered with by the criminally insane.

      The assassins included violent child mutilationists making AArtaud snuff porn while also filming through police psychiatric services saying one branch of their invasion would protect me from the other.  Meanwhile, faced with murderous and deadly brutality, neuro-compulsion and obscene, deranged allegations, they compounded the injury by demanding I go along with it as neurobedient signatory.  When I tried to even protect courtesy issues they brutally drove me into convulsive arrest, meanwhile they leered their bombings and rapes were honorary non-violence, I think so, they gurgled.  When appeased to prevent bystander murder, which they executed anyway, I was poisoned in the mouth by the covid bombers who demanded satisfaction for being snitched at their own compulsion.

      The question should be resolved peacefully as to who the evidence truly implicates, or donohue.