• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

The last hope, Brunson v. Adams

Bender

Known Troll
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Feb 12, 2014
    12,629
    44,246
    Cheyenne WY.

    Supreme Court considers Brunson v. Adams​

    Friday, December 16, 2022 7:30 PM
    By Tim Canova
    Professor of Law and Public Finance
    Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law


    While there has been much public attention on the U.S. Supreme Court’s present consideration of the “independent state legislature” theory in Moore v. Harper involving North Carolina’s redistricting, that case would not immediately upend the 2020 presidential election.

    In contrast, a little-known case that appeared recently on the Court docket could do just that. The case of Brunson v. Adams, not even reported in the mainstream media, was filed pro se by ordinary American citizens – four brothers from Utah — seeking the removal of President Biden and Vice President Harris, along with 291 U.S. representatives and 94 U.S. senators who voted to certify the electors to the Electoral College on Jan. 6, 2021 without first investigating serious allegations of election fraud in half a dozen states and foreign election interference and breach of national security in the 2020 presidential election. The outcome of such relief would presumably be to restore Donald Trump to the presidency.

    The important national security interests implicated in this case allowed the Brunsons to bypass an appeal that was frozen at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit and get the case to the Supreme Court which has now scheduled a hearing for January 6, 2023. The Brunson Petition for a Writ of Certiorari would require the votes of only four justices to move the case forward.

    It seems astounding that the Court would wade into such waters two years to the day after the Congressional vote to install Joe Biden as president. But these are not normal times. Democrats may well push legislation in this month’s lame duck session of Congress to impose term limits and a mandatory retirement age for justices, and thereby open the door to packing the Court.

    Such a course would seem to be clear violations of Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution which provides that Justices “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior.” In addition to such institutional threats to the Supreme Court, several justices and their families have been living under constant threats to their personal security since the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

    Perhaps these institutional and security threats have provided powerful incentives for the Court to put Brunson v. Adams on its docket as a shield to deter any efforts by the lame duck Congress to infringe on the Court’s independence. Or perhaps conservatives on the Court are serious about using the Brunson case as a sword to remove public officials who they believe have violated their constitutional Oaths of office by rubber-stamping electors on Jan. 6th without first conducting any investigation of serious allegations of election fraud and foreign election interference.

    Moreover, recent weeks have brought a cascade of news suggesting the likelihood of an impending constitutional crisis that could be difficult to resolve without the Court’s intervention.

    It is now clear that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was colluding with social media giants Twitter and Facebook to censor news of Hunter Biden’s laptop in the weeks leading up to the 2020 election – a most egregious First Amendment violation intended to rig the election outcome and perhaps to install an unaccountable and criminal puppet government. Meanwhile, the Jan. 6 committee may soon send a criminal referral to the Justice Department to arrest President Trump even though his reinstated tweets are a reminder that he was not calling for insurrection but for peaceful protest on Jan. 6.

    More recently, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was reportedly working with Big Tech to censor election critics.

    Supreme Court justices may well see these approaching storm clouds and conclude that the Court’s intervention is necessary to prevent larger civil unrest resulting from constitutional violations that are undermining public trust and confidence in the outcomes of both the 2020 and 2022 elections.

    When they break the Constitution — the supreme law of the land — to rig an election, the only recourse may be the Supreme Court or military tribunals.

    As the Brunson lawsuit argues, all of Congress was put on notice prior to its January 6th vote by more than a hundred of its own members detailing serious allegations of election frauds and calling for creation of an electoral commission to investigate the allegations.

    Moreover, the Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was required to submit a report on foreign threats to the 2020 Presidential election by December 18, 2020. That deadline was set by executive order and by Congress itself. When December 18th came and went without ODNI submitting its report, Congress should have started asking questions and investigating.

    In fact, DNI John Ratcliffe announced on that day that the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies he was overseeing had found evidence of foreign election interference but were split as to its significance and whether such breach of national security was sufficient to overturn the outcome of the election. And yet there was no action whatsoever by Congress, no inquiry and no investigation. Instead, Congress approved the possibly fraudulent election results on Jan. 6 without asking any questions of the DNI and the Intelligence Community.

    When the results of the 1876 presidential election were in doubt, Congress created a special Electoral Commission made up of five House members, five Senators, and five Supreme Court Justices to investigate.

    In contrast, in early 2021 Congress had nearly two weeks to investigate before the January 20th date of the presidential inauguration. Had Congress waited even just one more day to Jan. 7, they would have received the long-awaited ODNI report reflecting a split in the Intelligence Community and the DNI’s own conclusion that the People’s Republic of China had interfered to influence the outcome of the presidential election.

    As Dr. Barry A. Zulauf, the Analytic Ombudsman for the Intelligence Community, concluded at the time, the Intelligence Community shamefully delayed their findings until after the January 6th Electoral College certification by Congress because of their political disagreements with the Trump administration. This paints a picture of collusion and conspiracy involving members of Congress and U.S. intelligence agencies to cover up evidence of foreign election interference and constituting the crime of treason.

    The Brunson lawsuit does not claim the election was stolen, merely that a large majority of Congress, by failing to investigate such serious allegations of election rigging and breaches of national security, violated their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic – an oath also taken by Supreme Court justices and members of the U.S. military.

    The fact that the Brunson case has made it to the Court’s docket suggests profound concerns about a lawless Jan. 6 congressional committee, politicized federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies and major constitutional violations intended to overthrow an elected government by manipulating the outcome of the presidential election.

    Tim Canova is a Professor of Law and Public Finance at Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law, with broad experience in law teaching, private practice and public policy. He teaches Constitutional Law II: First Amendment Law, Corporations, Business Entities, Regulation of Financial Institutions, and a Seminar on Law, Finance, and Markets at Nova. This column is published with the permission of The Gateway Pundit https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...-seeking-overturn-2020-presidential-election/.




     
    1672835340178.png
     
    Shit HAS HAPPENED though. That’s my point. The fact that the Supreme Court took this from the 10th before they could rule on it is absolutely huge. This is the literal trial of the Constitution. This will tell us once and for all if we have an actual government, or are simply run by criminals forever.
     
    Personally, and you touched on this in your article, the constitution says good behavior, their time is not set. However the number of justices is not stated in the constitution but decided by "congress". I am not sure on the process of adding justices (need to look that up) but I think that will be more "easy" to get passed. Any changes to the terms to the justices will hit the constitution in the face and it will not see the light of day.

    The constitution will need to be amended to change the "good behavior" to a term length and that I think is a non starter, there will not be enough support for that.....I hope.

    However adding more justices is well inside the wheel house of the congress and I think that will be much more easy to get through.

    Is it not amazing on it is only now that we have this issue. One side does not own the court any longer and they want rule changes. They have come to rely on the courts to push their agendas and without it it will fall apart.

    I would not be shocked that adding terms will be shot down, but adding justices that has a real good chance to fly, and will give them what they want.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: lash and Bender
    I need to do more reading on how this is all done, generally I refer to "congress" as both the house and senate. In some places I see "congress" as only the senate. I don't know if it takes both "houses" to add justices to the court.

    Thanks you gave me something else to do digging on that will likely make me mad again.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Bender
    Shit HAS HAPPENED though. That’s my point. The fact that the Supreme Court took this from the 10th before they could rule on it is absolutely huge. This is the literal trial of the Constitution. This will tell us once and for all if we have an actual government, or are simply run by criminals forever.
    We will see. I hope it does but I’m not holding my breath on it. Prepare accordingly!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: madppcs and Bender
    Shit HAS HAPPENED though. That’s my point. The fact that the Supreme Court took this from the 10th before they could rule on it is absolutely huge. This is the literal trial of the Constitution. This will tell us once and for all if we have an actual government, or are simply run by criminals forever.
    Aw, com'on. We already know the answer to that.

    But we can hope.
     
    It'll never happen, because the SCOTUS knows it will precipitate a constitutional crisis and have the potential to push us to civil war, much more rapidly. They will never make these kinds of decisions and instead, allow the "system" correct itself at the ballot, which, ironically, is the corrupt and broken system that the case was born from. The Roberts court is not willing to rip off the bandaid and do what needs to be done. That being said, thank God for a slightly conservative leaning SCOTUS.
     
    It'll never happen, because the SCOTUS knows it will precipitate a constitutional crisis and have the potential to push us to civil war, much more rapidly. They will never make these kinds of decisions and instead, allow the "system" correct itself at the ballot, which, ironically, is the corrupt and broken system that the case was born from. The Roberts court is not willing to rip off the bandaid and do what needs to be done. That being said, thank God for a slightly conservative leaning SCOTUS.
    This was my thoughts as well.
     
    It'll never happen, because the SCOTUS knows it will precipitate a constitutional crisis and have the potential to push us to civil war, much more rapidly. They will never make these kinds of decisions and instead, allow the "system" correct itself at the ballot, which, ironically, is the corrupt and broken system that the case was born from. The Roberts court is not willing to rip off the bandaid and do what needs to be done. That being said, thank God for a slightly conservative leaning SCOTUS.
    We won't have to wait very long to find out..

    Prior to the case being docketed by SCOTUS, the case had been held up in the 10th. Concerned it would never move past the 10th, Brunson used rule 11 of the Supreme Court, which states “A petition for a writ of certiorari to review a case pending in a United States court of appeals, before judgment is entered in that court, will be granted only upon a showing that the case is of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this Court.” In other words, a case of such strong national importance could bypass a circuit court decision and be heard and ruled on by SCOTUS at any time they deem necessary. Brunson stated that the Supreme Court clerk had been reaching out to them to get this case be submitted in the proper format and prior to it being submitted had asked it to be brought ASAP, showing an interest in the court to consider the case.

    The conference date is set for tomorrow 1/6/23, the two year anniversary of the alleged breach. Tomorrow, the 9 Supreme Court Justices will decide whether or not to move the case to an official hearing.

     
    Shit HAS HAPPENED though. That’s my point. The fact that the Supreme Court took this from the 10th before they could rule on it is absolutely huge. This is the literal trial of the Constitution. This will tell us once and for all if we have an actual government, or are simply run by criminals forever.
    They grabbed it from the 10th so the 10th can’t unleash total chaos by supporting this case. Otherwise they would just let it work it’s way up to them. Keeping the power and influence solely within the circle of those 9 people.

    I have zero hope of SCOTUS supporting this petition.
     
    They grabbed it from the 10th so the 10th can’t unleash total chaos by supporting this case. Otherwise they would just let it work it’s way up to them. Keeping the power and influence solely within the circle of those 9 people.

    I have zero hope of SCOTUS supporting this petition.
    That’s what I’m afraid of
     
    Nothing will happen.

    The courts could rule tomorrow that the 2020 and 2022 elections were complete frauds and the court could agree with what we already know. 50% or more of Democrat voters are non-existent. The dead vote and have been voting for more than 100 years. Electronic voting machines are nearly complete fraud and that several leftist controlled "vote by mail" states are engaged in large scale fraud and absolutely nothing will happen.


    No media outlet other than Fox will cover the extent of the fraud and no elected official will address the fraud in any meaningful way.

    Courts will rule as they have before. They will say, "They is no proof of widespread organized fraud", this does not mean the fraud is not massive, it simply is stating the facts as they are presented. Those facts are that there is massive fraud in elections and it is not coordinated from a central leftist headquarters.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: SilentStalkr
    You are on your own. If all goes well, we may get another 25-50 years of some semblance of America and freedom which means most of us won’t see the complete collapse. But I’d be surprised if we don’t have major hurdles to overcome before then. It really all come down to what people are willing to accept!

    It’s funny cause on the way home from the office yesterday I heard one of our leaders on a talk show complaining that we cannot have 20 or so people bullying and holding up the speaker of the House vote! He claimed that their are 200 other people willing to vote now and that these 20 people were holding up progress and that we cannot let so few decide for the many! Haha. Oh the irony. I was like hmmm...seems to me like we have 600 something odd people deciding the things for the other 352 million of us on the daily lmao!
     
    Let's face it, her enemies have been trying to kill her, from within, since her birth... and here we are.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 6/250/40
    So, what’s the word? Anyone keeping up? I’m still going with ASGH but I’m curious! Am I blind cause I can’t find crap on this at the USSC website.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Bender
    So, how's this going?
    Asking for a friend.

    R
    Likely find out Monday.

    If it moves to hearing ? Who voted to move it will tell a lot. Only Conservative Justices, still hope. If any libs move it to hearing then it is only so it can be voted down and sent oblivion once and for all. JMHO