THE US SUPREME COURT HAS UNWITTUNGLY PUT THEMSELVES ON TRIAL BY HEARING THIS CASE.
This case does NOT seek to prove the 2020 election was rigged and fraudulent. It seeks to expel 291 Representatives and 94 Senators from Congress on charges ranging from failure to uphold their Oaths to Treason.
To many, this case is on point. If Congress can allow a duly elected President be removed in a Coup d'Etat that subsequently installs a criminal puppet government, it stands to reason such Congress members onvolved can be removed, expelled from public office.
What's good for the Goose, is good for the Gander.
The coming Constitutional Crisis can arrive via a number of approaches. The Brunson v. Adams case can bring such crisis closer whether it wins or loses at the Supreme Court. In that context, it is the US Supreme Court that is on trial here.
Two of many money quotes from the article above are repeated here:
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.
Undoubtedly, there will be some who sense this case goes nowhere, and they could very well be right.
But either way, it puts the spotlight on SCOTUS.
Bookmark
Don’t get excited about this one. Cert will be denied.
That doesn't happen in a vacuum.
This thread has several false and misleading comments.
This Petition has been dead listed and its sitting in the pile of Petitions that won’t even be touched at the January 6th conference by anyone except for one of the clerks to be instructed to put it on the CERTIORARI DENIED list in the next court orders release. Why? Because there has been no Call for a Response. For a Petition to be on the Discussion List at a Conference there would be at least a Call for Response by the Clerk. This happens anytime like this Petition that the Solicitor General’s office puts in their boilerplate Waiver on responding when they think the Petition doesn’t have a chance of having CERTIORARI GRANTED but then at least 1 Justice thinks the case ought to be discussed. Since the respondents on this Case are federal officials then its why the Solicitor General’s office would be given primary chance to weigh in for the respondents. See the docket for yourself and compare it to the dockets of petitions with CERTIORARI GRANTED and CERTIORARI DENIED to see for yourself.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-380.html
So, the question I have for anyone who thinks this Petition isn’t dead-listed is this - why has there been no Call for Response made by the Clerk of the Supreme Court?
I’ve asked this question several times in the past and got none of the Brunson case supporters answering it. I applaud their interest in trying to fix problems in the USA. Good heavens there are some serious problems with corruption in the USA federal government. I do think they are hurting their cause though by ignoring important questions like this, making exaggerations, and spreading false/misleading statements. What’s needed is integrity and forthrightness.
> Note: Canova’s article here was written before President Trump announced today that the J6 Committee had dropped their subpoena of him. This should result in not arresting him.
I am not so certain.
Take for example an seditious conspiracy allegation:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4119447/posts?page=11#11
one may argue that it is overbroad (etc), and therefore unenforceable, but a hypothetical first pass on such an indictment would be up to the trial judge. an indictment based on this would presumably come from the activist DoJ. An activist judge, riding whatever is left of the political wave, could throw the ultimate decision into the path of the SC...
(I am not a lawyer, etc)
“The fact that the Brunson case has made it to the Court’s docket suggests profound concerns...”
Rather than profound concerns, it suggests ordinary procedure, which for the vast majority of cases ends quietly with a one-line denial of the Writ.
The members of SCOTUS have got to be remembering what happened to Scalia and the demonstrations orchestrated at their homes as they decide about hearing this case.
I recall that we had these kinds of lawsuits come up when obama was president. the lawsuits contested his citizenship or various aspects of his eligibility.
The cases were brought before the supreme court for consideration as to whether to make a ruling on them.
The supreme court decided not to make a ruling on those cases during obama’s tenure. They will decide not to make a ruling on this case as well.
I hope this one is approved and goes full-headline all the way. Maybe I’m dreaming, but I think it’s long past time for America to start healing, and the Supremes still have enough gravitas and clout to get things done.
Let the fur fly!
NOT AGAIN! It won’t even be discussed on 6 January. They won’t debate it or pay any attention to it. It isn’t “unexpected” that it gets a “hearing”. All the cases filed get a “hearing” - and the vast majority never get a single word of talk.
There is a reason the government has not filed a response to this case.
“It seeks to expel 291 Representatives and 94 Senators from Congress on charges ranging from failure to uphold their Oaths to Treason.”
How would Pence fit in to the suit? He also failed to uphold his oath.
Thanx for the heads up
p
These guys have been around, a long time!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PX7x6Mw2tg&feature=youtu.be
Good for them...and, Godspeed!