Skip to comments.
possible removal of asitting President and Vice President of the United Statesalong with members of the United States Congress (SCOTUS req for certiorari)
Supreme Court Docket ^
| 10/20/22
| SCOTUS
Posted on 11/16/2022 8:42:24 AM PST by C210N
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-108 next last
To: C210N
Who is Raland J. Brunson (petitioner).
Expect to be denied due to lack of standing.
21
posted on
11/16/2022 9:30:49 AM PST
by
Valpal1
(Not even the police are safe from the police!!!)
To: C210N
Cert. Denied. And I don’t even need to break out a crystal ball for that one.
To: C210N
Maybe our Supreme justices realized that Communists have no need of their services.
23
posted on
11/16/2022 9:32:58 AM PST
by
RideForever
(Damn, another dangling par .....)
To: C210N
The case is hopeless. Some guy representing himself who writes stuff like this in his petition:
‘e) Due to the uniqueness of this case, the trial court does have proper authority to remove the Respondents from their offices under 18 U.S. Code § 2381 which states “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. ”’
He actually thinks that he can petition for a criminal conviction in a civil case.
To: C210N
“That ‘laugh’ is actually on the SCOTUS docket.”
Plenty of stuff gets on the docket after being rightly rejected by lower courts, and is quickly rejected by SCOTUS as well.
To: C210N
This is a serious threat to Thomas. An attempt to make him die of laughter.
To: C210N; All
Will someone please post in a few sentences and in plain English what-and-who this is all about...and what is its impact on you or me or the presidency or whoever or whatever????
I used to be a professional writer for a magazine publishing house, but dang if I can decipher what the subject/object is in this "request for certiorari" thingie.
Leni
27
posted on
11/16/2022 9:47:55 AM PST
by
MinuteGal
( MAGA !...............MAGA !................MAGA !)
To: quikstrike98
28
posted on
11/16/2022 9:51:02 AM PST
by
MomwithHope
(Forever grateful to all our patriots, past, present and future.)
To: MinuteGal
29
posted on
11/16/2022 10:05:16 AM PST
by
lastchance
(Credo.)
To: quikstrike98
There is zero chance this gets heard.
30
posted on
11/16/2022 10:11:19 AM PST
by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
To: Georgia Girl 2
You’re most likely correct. Sadly.
To: quikstrike98
32
posted on
11/16/2022 10:14:08 AM PST
by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
To: Georgia Girl 2
To: C210N
It's a pro se case, meaning the petitioner has no attorney. SCOTUS refused its constitutional obligation to hear the Texas v. Pennsylvania case under its mandatory original jurisdiction. It's not likely to take a pro se case on the same matter. I would like to be wrong, but getting four justices to hear the case, meaning three more than Justice Thomas, is not likely.
34
posted on
11/16/2022 10:19:50 AM PST
by
Dr. Franklin
("A republic, if you can keep it." )
To: C210N
35
posted on
11/16/2022 10:28:00 AM PST
by
Alter Kaker
(Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
To: C210N
SCOTUS made it clear in January of last year that there are no rules when it comes to elections. And we can be damn sure that every other court in the country got the message.No rules!
To: Gay State Conservative
If we still lived in a Constitutional Republic, in reality, then something along these lines would have been heard by the SCOTUS withing months of the 2020 election fraudery.
The deep state/globalist oligarchy owns men such as Pence and Roberts and Schumer and Biden and McConnell and NAsty Smellousy (oh wait, that one is not a 'men' per se)..
37
posted on
11/16/2022 10:50:24 AM PST
by
MHGinTN
(A dispensation perspective is a powerful tool for discernment)
To: C210N
38
posted on
11/16/2022 11:18:57 AM PST
by
dragnet2
(Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
To: quikstrike98
We’ll, if my dog poops out a ham sandwich, we’ll all have a wonderful lunch. The two events are equally likely to occur.
Seriously, didn’t we learn our lesson in 2020 with the magic executive orders, quo warranto writs, and imminent invocations of the Insurrection Act? This is bull crap. Nothing will come of it. It is a waste of time to spend a single minute contemplating it.
And I expressed these sentiments back then, so I’ll go ahead and cue the idiot “”At least someone’s doing something” response that would always be given back then
39
posted on
11/16/2022 11:59:48 AM PST
by
j.havenfarm
(21 years on Free Republic, 12/10/21! More than 5000 replies and still not shutting up!)
To: Terry L Smith
40
posted on
11/16/2022 2:00:44 PM PST
by
sauropod
(Fascists also buy Comcast cable packages" - Olby - Wanna buy mine?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-108 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson