One post lands in three jurisdictions, and the tightest rulebook wins
A website can be split by jurisdiction. A feed cannot, so every post goes out under whichever of the three sets of advertising rules is strictest.
A firm admitted in the District, in Maryland and in Virginia answers to three bars at once, and a post does not stay inside the jurisdiction it was written for. A video made with a Montgomery County audience in mind is served to somebody in Alexandria the same afternoon and to a federal contractor in Reston the day after.
So write to the tightest of the three and stop treating the other two as the exception. Testimonials, anything that describes a result, comparative claims about other firms and language that could be read as a promise are where the rules diverge most, and the differences are not intuitive from one river crossing to the next.
The awkward part is that the tightest rule usually governs the material a marketer likes best. Client praise, before and after framing, and any suggestion that an outcome repeats are all risky when three bars can look at the same clip and reach different conclusions about it.
Have your own counsel settle the standing questions once instead of post by post. What a caption may claim, what a disclaimer has to carry, what your obligations are when you comment under somebody else's post. Then keep that answer in writing, because whoever schedules a Friday afternoon post is usually not a lawyer.