Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Could Brothers from Ogden, Utah, Have Found a Way To FIX The 2020 Election?
Creative Destruction Media (CDM.press) ^ | Rob Cunningham + Bill Quinn

Posted on 11/28/2022 7:01:51 PM PST by RobaWho

Brunson v. Adams was filed out of Ogden Utah. The case has been accepted for review by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS.)

What is this case about? How does it concern me?

Following the 2020 election, certain legislators, Senators and others brought forward evidence and claims suggesting there was some sort of malfeasance during the 2020 election.

Once these claims and evidence were brought forward following the election, Congress was required to pause in order to investigate and ascertain the validity of these concerns. Among other things, this pause would have delayed the January 6th vote by Congress to certify the Electors and thus confirm the results of the election and next President of the United States.

Mike Pence and members of Congress voted NOT to pause nor did they implement an investigation surrounding these claims. Congress proceeded to confirm the Electors and their votes and name Joe Biden as newly elected President.

The case asserts that by failing to fulfill the requirement to investigate, all those who refused to investigate failed to fulfill their Oaths to protect the Country and Constitution. Failure to protect the Country is tantamount to committing treason. Consequently, these officials are open to investigation on such charges and if found guilty they could face the associated penalties.

The case asks that all those who failed to protect the Country be immediately removed from office and barred from holding future public office for the remainder of their lives. This would potentially include the President, Vice President and more than 380 members of Congress. Were this to be granted it could be followed by further investigation into their actions which could lead to criminal proceedings.

Why is this case now before the Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court has thousands of cases brought to it for review each year. It is the Court’s decision which cases to take on and typically they review a relatively small number (several hundred per year of the thousands submitted.)

This case is before SCOTUS because they CHOSE to review this case.

Why would this case of all of those brought forward be one of those chosen for review? Most Constitutional professors and those familiar with the Supreme Court would suggest that the Court would be extremely unlikely to take this case on. It’s too controversial, too volatile, too outlandish. So the question remains “why did they agree to review this case?”

Who asked for Congress to pause and investigate?

During the first week of January 2021, prior to January 6th, amidst numerous instances of emerging evidence and concerns, U.S. Senators Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson, James Lankford, Steve Daines, Marsha Blackburn, and Mike Braun, along with Senators-Elect Cynthia Lummis, Roger Marshall, Bill Hagerty and Tommy Tuberville, issued a statement calling for a 10-day pause in the Electoral process, and further asked Congress to appoint an Electoral Commission and to perform an emergency audit on the election results from the disputed States.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2020; brunson; brunsonvadams; election2020; riggedelection; scotus; supremecourt; treason; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last
To: x

1) Supreme Court Clerk CHOSE this case & Clerk assisted with filing
2) Lame Duck Congress planning to expand SC to 15 seats, pack court, reduce lifetime tenure of Justices - an open secret in DC
3) SC votes for plaintiff, it thrives as designed
4) SC denies plaintiff, it becomes irrelevant overnight
5) SC won’t be required to claim “Trump won”
6) SC only claims law was clearly ignored, violated
7) SC lives or dies with this decision in hand
8) Bitch & moan all you wish, these are the facts


61 posted on 11/29/2022 3:50:40 AM PST by RobaWho (I Love the U.S. Constitution, as written.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: RetAF_fedUP

1) Supreme Court Clerk CHOSE this case & Clerk assisted with filing
2) Lame Duck Congress planning to expand SC to 15 seats, pack court, reduce lifetime tenure of Justices - an open secret in DC
3) SC votes for plaintiff, it thrives as designed
4) SC denies plaintiff, it becomes irrelevant overnight
5) SC won’t be required to claim “Trump won”
6) SC only claims law was clearly ignored, violated
7) SC lives or dies with this decision in hand
8) Bitch & moan all you wish, these are the facts


62 posted on 11/29/2022 3:51:17 AM PST by RobaWho (I Love the U.S. Constitution, as written.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: princess leah

Seems to me this should apply to the Supreme Court...they let us all down in the 2020 election. They were the last refuge for defense and they turned away from their responsibility for technicalities.


63 posted on 11/29/2022 5:04:33 AM PST by ThePatriotsFlag (When Ashli Babbitt’s video-taped murderer Michael Byrd is indicted, I’ll start paying attention.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RobaWho; All

Would be good to have a link to the filed complaint.

In the complaint, it is required that Plaintiff’s state claims upon which relief may be granted.

Claims that officeholders failed to do their duty will need to present how they had knowledge and intent, yet failed to follow their required duty.

It will be easy for any officeholder to respond there was no evidence that rose to the level of halting proceedings, or they didn’t know about it, or the requested delay time was inadequate to complete an investigation or hearings where conclusions could be drawn and matters addressed. This last option may give grounds for House hearings, but as elected members are largely in on it, it will fall back to voters who have been unwittingly stripped of their power to choose.

The SCOTUS hearing will serve only to leave a record of why such challenges were unsuccessful.

I wish it were different.

The truth is that the Cultural Marxist Fascist takedown of the United States via subversion of its elections systems and installation of key officeholders cannot be reversed, let alone stopped, via judicial action, nor legislative action as the latter is vulnerable to subversion of election processes underlying it.

There can be pyrrhic victories in law and legislation, but these will stay confined to small nonimpacting jurisdictions. They will very likely not grow.

History shows the only way to reverse a Cultural Marxist or fascist takeover from within is via a populist uprising where people are willing to die or go to jail to effect change. This has/had a chance recently in AZ but will likely fade out as a whimper when most media move on to different subjects.

I wish it were different.


64 posted on 11/29/2022 5:07:03 AM PST by Hostage (Article V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobaWho

According to certain Never-Trumper FReepers, the 2020 erection was the most secure in US history, and Trump is a three-time loser.

Move along, folks, there’s nothing to see here.


65 posted on 11/29/2022 5:11:51 AM PST by Fresh Wind (Fake news, fake pandemic, fake vaccine, fake election, fake president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

The Executive and the Congress must abide by the law as it is written. Enforcement of that is the Court’s function.


66 posted on 11/29/2022 5:30:32 AM PST by Texas Fossil ((Texas is not where you were born, but a Free State of Heart, Mind & Attitude!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RobaWho; All
1) Supreme Court Clerk CHOSE this case & Clerk assisted with filing 2) Lame Duck Congress planning to expand SC to 15 seats, pack court, reduce lifetime tenure of Justices - an open secret in DC 3) SC votes for plaintiff, it thrives as designed 4) SC denies plaintiff, it becomes irrelevant overnight 5) SC won’t be required to claim “Trump won” 6) SC only claims law was clearly ignored, violated 7) SC lives or dies with this decision in hand 8) Bitch & moan all you wish, these are the facts

I can't help but wonder how much do the other 8 justices appreciate psuedojustice Jackson and having the experience of having to deal with the typical "assertive" affirmative action black female on a daily basis? Overturning the 2020 election could remove that bit of cultural enrichment from daily life at SCOTUS.
67 posted on 11/29/2022 7:02:13 AM PST by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: RobaWho

“Congress was required to pause in order to investigate and ascertain the validity of these concerns. Among other things, this pause would have delayed the January 6th vote by Congress to certify the Electors and thus confirm the results of the election and next President of the United States.”

What is the Constitutional and legal basis of this charge??


68 posted on 11/29/2022 9:19:23 AM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

The court has no enforcement mechanism.

It takes 2 of the 3 coequal branches to make any aspect of law real.


69 posted on 11/29/2022 9:39:48 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: RobaWho
This is almost as bad as the other thread. A clerk will add this to dismissal, that dismissal list will issue Dec. 12 or Jan. 23. I'll be back to collect...

nikosjustanothernimrod

70 posted on 11/29/2022 4:21:48 PM PST by StAnDeliver (Tanned, rested, and ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: princess leah

They refused to take the other cases, letting lower cases stand. I can understand much of this, since the SCOTUS wants to appear apolitical.

I personally had a big problem with the lawsuit from Texas against the other states that refused to follow their own elections laws, thus depriving the voice of people from Texas and other states. (Allowing Election rigging in your state effects other states on a federal election level). The SCOTUS took a political side by refusing to hear this original jurisdiction case.

Here, they are picking a case that deals with events of the 2020 election werein the law is clean and rights were ignored. The call for a pause, and emergency audit/investigation wasn’t a call to overturn any voting, but to directly address potential illegal acts. Yet, they had a constitutional duty to ensure that the election was investigated and was found to be the voice of the people. They refused. This is a clean case of did they follow the law or not.

Since they have taken up the case, they have not ‘vacated’ it. They will hear arguments. The will make a decision. This case is interesting to me because the plantiffs picked a point in time where procedure wasn’t followed, and riots and deaths co-existed. Would there have been a ‘Jan 6th’ if the law had been followed?


71 posted on 11/30/2022 11:16:02 AM PST by Pete Dovgan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Governor Dinwiddie
All this assumes that we still have a constitutional republic, and that the supremes actually give a damn.

Fixed: "All this assumes that we still have a constitutional republic, and that the supremes aren't in on the scam or scared to death of being suicided by the junta."
72 posted on 11/30/2022 11:19:53 AM PST by Antoninus (Republicans are all honorable men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pete Dovgan

Morning, Freepers! Word on the “street” is the Brunson Case was fully ADJUDICATED on Friday, Nov. 25, 2022. Given that we remain in a state
of National Emergency, and we’ve been engaged in a global war against the darkest forces on earth & in the spiritual realm, never forget the Supreme Court (and those who are controlling this Kangaroo Court), have infinite flexibility as to when they announce & enforce their decision. Battlefield conditions are always fluid and timing is always critical. The most essential truth in wartime is to never pre-announce your actions so your enemy can make adjustments. DECEPTION is the single most powerful weapon in wartime - Tsun Zu


73 posted on 12/01/2022 8:59:34 AM PST by RobaWho (I Love the U.S. Constitution, as written.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: RobaWho

Denied:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/010923zor_p860.pdf


74 posted on 01/09/2023 7:45:37 AM PST by Rob_Henry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson