Posted on 02/15/2023 11:57:54 AM PST by bitt
A "rigged election" is equivalent to war since both "put into power" a "victor," argues plaintiff, and therefore allegations of a rigged election must be investigated.
The Supreme Court is set to reconsider whether to hear a lawsuit alleging President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Vice President Mike Pence, 291 House members, and 94 senators violated their oaths of office by refusing to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election before certifying Biden as the victor on Jan. 6, 2021, allowing for Biden and Harris to be "fraudulently" inaugurated.
The plaintiff, Raland J. Brunson, seeks the defendants' removal from office for violating their oaths.
After the Supreme Court declined on Jan. 9 to hear Brunson's lawsuit, he filed a petition for reconsideration on Jan. 23. On Feb. 1, the court scheduled the private conference for reconsidering the petition on Friday, when four of the nine justices must vote to grant the case a hearing for it to move forward.
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
maybe they are thinking about their very own kids
“What happens if SCOTUS rule that the 2020 election was a fraudulent farce? Will they install Trump as the rightful POTUS?”
If this fantasy actually ocurred, they could order a new (fraudulent) election.
Do not confuse your feelings for facts. I would venture to guess you didn’t bother to read the underlying pleadings/motions before opining to the world that the case has merit.
Oh REALLY?
Not holding breath, but you still made me look.
.........like a kitten playing with a ball of yarn, these 9 lawyers on the Supreme Court will F this opportunity up.
Opportunity you say? Yes, because this case, on many levels, could save this country and be the all time, all time most important case in the history of the United States Supreme Court. Future generations would carve these 9 justices in granite on the mall in Washington.
But, sigh, they will F it up, I guarantee and be carved on outhouse walls all over America.
They’ve basically said it’s up to the state legislatures. If they’re fine with fraud then who are we to quibble.
C.J. Roberts will GUARANTEE that the Supremes will punt on this one. And, if not, Coney-Barrett and Kavenaugh will wimp out.
In his petition for reconsideration, Brunson argues that there must be a penalty for violating oaths of office or else they are "not binding.
A "rigged election" is equivalent to war since both "put into power" a "victor," he argues, and therefore allegations of "a rigged election" must be investigated.
"The Oath of Office requires that aid and comfort cannot be given to those levying war through a rigged election," Brunson writes.
The Supreme Court is set to reconsider whether to hear a lawsuit alleging President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Vice President Mike Pence, 291 House members, and 94 senators violated their oaths of office by refusing to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election before certifying Biden as the victor on Jan. 6, 2021, allowing for Biden and Harris to be "fraudulently" inaugurated.You don't really have to wait for a decision from the Court, the answer is no.
Although someone should arrest those named in the article, the supremes would need to arrest themselves should the money be pulled from the Union of lamestream media, supremes, congresscritters and executive branch.
I don’t think so. The Senate went into closed sessions to hear any objections....and all objections were eventually dismissed.
Agreed. There are already constitutional mechanisms in place to remove people from these offices. Impeachment & Conviction (House & Senate against executive branch players), and Expulsion (House against House members, Senate against Senate members). The bodies that have impeachment & expulsion powers are the only people that have standing to bring a suit of this nature. There is no such thing as taxpayer or voter standing.
Purely for show. The USSC has already made it perfectly clear that they could care less about vote fraud. in fact they love it.
Exactly right.
The Court has no legal authority to remove large numbers of Congress criters and the President and Vice President.
So when the SC denies it will have been debunked. Yawn.
It’s dumb as dirt to think the USSC gets a vote in this matter.
Congressional power over certification is plenary.
And this conservative Court will not hear the case.
this is one of the biggest news items i’ve seen in a while
i hope this guy gets the support he needs
“After the Supreme Court declined on Jan. 9 to hear Brunson’s lawsuit...”
Funny, after about 1000 hype posts that were made here prior to that, which were attempting to fool people into believing the SC had actually agreed to hear the case, I don’t think we heard a peep about it being rejected.
A loser before the Supreme Court can file a Petition to Reconsider as a matter of right. That doesn't mean the Supreme Court will give it the slightest consideration.
“If somehow the court declared fraud and reinstated Trump wouldn’t that mean he can’t run in 2024?”
Indeed it would, since the relevant amendment says that you cannot be elected to the office more than twice, regardless of whether you actually get to serve your term of office. So the court could find in Trump’s favor on Jan, 19th, 2024 and he’d be disqualified, even if he had already won a 3rd election.
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.