Advertisement
POPULAR TOPICSSupreme Court | Politics | Biden Scandals | Election 2024 | Opinion | Media Bias |Essays from Mike | Tributes |

Latest News

December 16, 2022
|

The Supreme Court has agreed to a hearing for a case that could conceivably --- PLEASE consider this the longest of long shots --- overturn the election of 2020, throw out all the legislators who voted to certify the results and leave them ineligible to run for office ever again, even for town dogcatcher.

The case has been added to the docket for, appropriately, January 6, 2023.

There’s essentially no media attention being given to this case; most news outlets find it much too hot to touch. But the heat doesn’t faze us; we keep a pair of oven mitts close by for times like this.

As Joshua Philipp reported in a podcast for EPOCH TV, the case Brunson v. Alma Adams, et. al., alleges that members of Congress who voted against the proposed 10-day audit of the 2020 elections and certifying those results --- with no investigation after being “properly warned” of a credible threat from enemies of the Constitution --- were violating their oath of office to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic.” It says that “this action unilaterally violated the rights of every citizen of the U.S.A. and perhaps the rights of every person living, and all courts of law.”

If SCOTUS ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, the remedy would conceivably involve removing the sitting President and Vice President and all those representatives and empower the Court to authorize the swearing-in of the rightful President and Vice President. Not kidding; that’s the remedy the plaintiffs are asking for.

The Brunson brothers are an interesting group –- literally a band of brothers, as they play in a trumpet band. Here they are, with their summary of the suit, which was reportedly written by just themselves, without legal counsel (!).

https://ralandbrunson.com

Note: Philipp’s report was made before SCOTUS agreed to hear the case, and he said then he would be “very surprised” if they did. So I guess he’s very surprised right now. Actually, I am, too, considering the way the Court refused to look into those very allegations in the weeks after the election, when they were brought by President Trump. (Of course, now we know much more about the lengths to which Trump’s enemies went to interfere with the outcome. Maybe enough Justices are feeling some guilt right now about calling the issue “moot.”)

Philipp also pointed out that this segment of his show, “Crossroads,” would not be allowed on YouTube. (Good news, though: he can now post the link on Twitter!) We’ll include the EPOCH TV link here…

https://www.theepochtimes.com/supreme-court-weighs-on-brunson-v-alma-case-that-could-overturn-2020-election_4907648.html

The argument in this case is that by not looking into serious allegations of election fraud, those who voted to confirm the results of the 2020 election broke their oath of office and are ineligible to run for any elected office again. To give you an idea of the scope of the potential fallout, Kamala Harris is in that group, and so is Mike Pence.

This started as two separate lawsuits brought by four brothers in Utah, but only one of them is advancing to the Supreme Court. To get it there, the brothers bypassed the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, where it was stalled, by saying in a cover letter that this suit was a matter of national security. The Court was apparently so interested in this case that they received a personal call from the Court clerk asking how soon they could get their documents together. The brothers got it all to them in one week.

The suit names President Biden, VP Harris, former VP Pence, and 385 members of Congress, and, no, that is not a typo. Those are all the members who voted against a proposition for them to investigate claims that “enemies of the Constitution rigged the 2020 election.” So, this case is NOT about whether or not election fraud occurred. It’s about whether or not these people violated their oath by failing to investigate credible allegations of election rigging by enemies of the Constitution –- allegations that had been made by over a hundred of their own colleagues.

In their words: “Is this about a rigged election? No, it’s about the members of Congress who voted AGAINST the investigation, thereby thwarting the investigation. Was this a clear violation of their oath? YES.” The suit says this violation is an act of treason and fraud. “A successfully rigged election has the same effect as an act of war: to place into power whom the victor wants, which in this case is Biden, who, if not stopped immediately, will continue to destroy the fundamental freedoms of Brunson and all U.S. Citizens and courts of law.”

When the allegations of a rigged election came forward, the Respondents had a duty under law to investigate it or be removed from office.”

According to Philipp, a finding for the plaintiffs would “also restore Trump to office because he would have been the legitimate candidate.” We’re not yet sure how that part of the argument works but are researchingEven if a majority of the Justices found merit in this case, would they be willing to do something this huge? They would be keeping in mind the potential consequences and, of course, possible effects on the balance of power. If this happened, it would be the wildest things ever to happen within our government --- a purge, really, which, I have to admit, sounds pretty great with the state our country is currently inBut you know the saying, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Here are some thoughts on the case from Timothy Canova, a professor of constitutional law at the Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law.

Tim Canova: Supreme Court Considers Case Seeking to Overturn 2020 Presidential Election

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

More Stories

The SCOTUS Leak

Sit down; I guarantee this Supreme Court story is real

Comments 1-10 of 25

  • Trumpers are clueless

    01/09/2023 03:46 AM

    Everything Mark Grinstead is not only demonstrably false, it reads like Russian agitprop.

  • Mark Grinstead

    01/04/2023 08:41 AM

    If this legal case is proven true at the Supreme Court it would be the greatest thing to ever happen within our government. And it should because the Twitter Files prove that the FBI did alter the course of the 2020 election by suppressing the release of the Hunter Biden laptop. That alone changed the election results. That is an open and shut case proven by surveys conducted by the American public. The 2020 election was stolen and the proof is clear as the rising sun. If a proper investigation is conducted a great deal more evidence of voter fraud will be revealed. The movie Two Thousand Mules showed some of the techniques that were used to commit fraud during that election and a proper investigation will reveal a great deal more if the right person is heading the investigation. The January 6th protest was an abreaction to the fraud that occurred during that election and the January 6th Select Committee covered up the truth of what happened on that day a new real investigation should be conducted so the truth can be revealed. The FBI, the department tasked to uphold justice in America did instead thwart justice by using Twitter to alter the results of the 2020 election and that is without a doubt criminal and justice screams out for a reckoning.

  • william cushing

    01/03/2023 04:33 PM

    Thanks Gov. Huckabee for your support and guarantee. There is a lot more of the silent majority waiting for our opportunity to right our nation!
    THANKS .BILL

  • Trumpers are clueless

    12/28/2022 02:49 AM

    Promoting disinformation from the leading spreader of it on the internet is perfect, Huck. Goes right along with you promoting your girlfriend Powell's lunacy.

  • Trumpers are clueless

    12/27/2022 08:48 PM

    For the delusional in this thread, the 2020 election was the most scrutinized, investigated election in US history. You simply ignored the investigations that took place.

  • Trumpers are clueless

    12/27/2022 07:08 PM

    Hard to believe old Huck is wrong again. SCOTUS has not agreed to hear this trash and never will. The petition is deadlisted and will be officially denied by a clerk next month.

    The petition is set to be in conference, not to be heard. You'd think a former governor would have a clue how courts work but, nope, Huck can't even get that right.

  • Helen S. Tritt

    12/22/2022 02:59 PM

    Very Interesting Governor Huckabee. I hope and pray that the Supreme Court will follow through with this TREMENDOUS CASE THAT WILL KNOCK THE SOCKS OFF. It is about time we get a reprieve from the horrible democrat STUNTS. I pray to God they will do the right thing by taking ACTION against those who are DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY.

  • Robert Mallory

    12/22/2022 02:47 PM

    When I told a friend of mine about this she looked up the Docket of the Supreme Court and said there was no mention of this. Has the hearing been cancelled or rescheduled?

  • JEROME E. McHugh

    12/22/2022 12:01 PM

    while I worry for the U. S. and would like to see the current error (Joe Biden) corrected I dread the upheaval such actions would bring about. In the immortal words of Rodney King(R. I. P. )
    Can't we all get along?!

  • val griffith

    12/20/2022 02:38 PM

    If there was a legitimate, honest, investigation of the 2020 election , I could accept the results . Til that happens , I consider it an illegal power grab.