Whether Nextdoor has the right to take down legal statements about government corruption

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Before October 1, 2022: 1. While trying to get public interest and inform the public on the corruption of the Judges of Yavapai County and Appellate court Judges, Nextdoor, a public platform was used. Does Nextdoor, have the right to take down statements that are legal and not against any of the rules agreed upon to use the site, when it comes to this case? 2. Does Nextdoor {a public platform), with mostly moderators of government employment, have the right to take down public record, legal statements against the government, that were made on its forum, about this case? 3. With the above questions, does this violate the First Amendment of Freedom of Speech? 4 Whether statute of limitations was up when complaint was filed May 1, 2018 (grand jury decision 8-22-2018) and date of accident was 9-10-2016, on the misdemeanor charge? 5. Whether counsel was efficient in representing defendant by not asking for a preliminary hearing or evidence for Ms. Stafford to look at, to see if, she actually hit the electrical pole, because Ms. Stafford could not remember the accident and let every single lawyer she had know this? Whether counsel was efficient at all? 6. Whether statue of limitations was up when Mr. Dunn had a second insurance claim filed for his whole house, processed on 9-16-2017 (date of accident 9-10-2016)? 7. Is an oral pronouncement of sentence what Blacks Law Dictionary states or what these Judges state, in there denial of all of Ms. Stafford’s Notice of Petitions in 2022? 8. Did Superior Court and the Appellate Court err in stating all Notice for Petitions that were filed, were untimely? : 9. Whether it was acceptable for Mr. Dunn and the State to include damage that wasn't damaged by Ms. Stafford and her car? 10. = Whether the Dunn’s had a right to file a claim that was supposed to be processed with in one year of the 1 check for depreciation value only, not another estimate (it is in their claim and my letter to Foremost Insurance)? 14. Did insurance adjuster, Daniel Beal, with Foremost Insurance, commit fraud when he submitted an accepted depreciation claim, when in fact it was an estimate for damages, over a year after the first estimate? 12. Whether Superior Court erred in extending probation for restitution only? ; 001 7 80 QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; 12A. Whether Superior Court erred in extending probation or was probation expired before pronouncement of sentence by Ainley? 13. Whether Superior Court erred when putting Ms. Stafford in jail for not paying restitution, especially after dropping probation and converting restitution to civil suit? ' 44. Why isn’t there a lien instead of a promise of a civil suit, if the state were not embezzling money? 15. Whether Superior Court sentenced Ms. Stafford twice for the same crime, when extending probation for the felony of criminal damage even though Ms. Stafford served the three year sentence, on probation, and plea agreement clearly states; probation is not to ; exceed three years? 16. Ms. Stafford had car insurance. Why wasn’t insurance claims paid, by her insurance, before it all became restitution? 17. Why hasn’t Foremost Insurance sued Ms. Stafford for the Dunn’s estimate that was paid out as a depreciation claim (this would have happened, if the insurance company new anything about Ms. Stafford and her car insurance.}? 18. Because of Ms. Stafford’s past record, did states attorney dismiss original charges (which should have been sufficient), to bring criminal charges against Ms. Stafford( All in the name of money.)? 19. Whether APS should be charged with fraud, if the electrical pole was not hit or broken? 20. Whether state erred in not bringing charges against APS for filing a fraudulent insurance claim, with Ms. Stafford’s car insurance? 21. Whether state and APS are co-conspirators in this case? 22. | Whether Mr. and Mrs. Dunn and State of Arizona, along with States Attorney, should be charged with fraud for damages that should not have been clai