The case of Brunson v. Adams and what it could mean

Good day all. Recently the United States Supreme Court accepted a case that could, potentially, send shock waves throughout the country. The case is Brunson v. Adams, and seeks the removal of Joe Biden and a large number of Congress critters.

I stumbled across this case entirely by accident. Someone posted a link to a law professors blog, and he details the case and the potential ramifications. Here are the details as provided from The Highland County Press:

While there has been much public attention on the U.S. Supreme Court’s present consideration of the “independent state legislature” theory in Moore v. Harper involving North Carolina’s redistricting, that case would not immediately upend the 2020 presidential election.

From what I know of this case, Moore v. Harper, it basically seeks to put the entire election process and reviews back in the hands of the state legislatures. As I recall, it uses Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution as the basis of the case.

Section 4

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

This is what has been blowing up all over the MSM and Socialist media. The Progressives have been screeching to the high heavens that it will suppress the right to vote and for the Democrats to steal elections. (That last bit is a little hyperbole on my part) However, the Brunson v. Adams case is quite a bit different according to the author, Tim Canova.

In contrast, a little-known case that appeared recently on the Court docket could do just that. The case of Brunson v. Adams, not even reported in the mainstream media, was filed pro se by ordinary American citizens – four brothers from Utah — seeking the removal of President Biden and Vice President Harris, along with 291 U.S. representatives and 94 U.S. senators who voted to certify the electors to the Electoral College on Jan. 6, 2021 without first investigating serious allegations of election fraud in half a dozen states and foreign election interference and breach of national security in the 2020 presidential election. The outcome of such relief would presumably be to restore Donald Trump to the presidency.

I suspect it was ignored by the media since the few who looked into it never thought it would reach the Supreme Court. Surprise! It did.

The important national security interests implicated in this case allowed the Brunsons to bypass an appeal that was frozen at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit and get the case to the Supreme Court which has now scheduled a hearing for January 6, 2023. The Brunson Petition for a Writ of Certiorari would require the votes of only four justices to move the case forward.

Again, Mr. Canova, who is a professor of Law, may be aiming his article towards those far better versed in the law. For instance, the term “Writ of Certiorari.” I have heard it but never knew exactly what it meant. Here is the definition from the Legal Information Institute:

A type of writ, meant for rare use, by which an appellate court decides to review a case at its discretion.  The word certiorari comes from Law Latin and means “to be more fully informed.”  A writ of certiorari orders a lower court to deliver its record in a case so that the higher court may review it.  The U.S. Supreme Court uses certiorari to select most of the cases it hears. The writ of certiorari is a common law writ, which may be abrogated or controlled entirely by statute or court rules.

Now if I’m understanding this, four members of the Supreme Court were interested in this case and approved it for a hearing. According to M. Canova, the case will be heard January 6^th, 2023. (An interesting date to be sure) Apparently, it is the national security aspects of the case that pushed it to the head of the line. It had been stalled at the 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals.

It seems astounding that the Court would wade into such waters two years to the day after the Congressional vote to install Joe Biden as president. But these are not normal times. Democrats may well push legislation in this month’s lame duck session of Congress to impose term limits and a mandatory retirement age for justices, and thereby open the door to packing the Court.

That is a nonstarter. Judges are appointed for life, or until they decide to step down. It would take a constitutional amendment to change that, and that would take years. As for packing the court? That would be a good way to utterly destroy the judicial system in the United States. Of course, several justices have been threatened by left wing terrorists over the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Perhaps these institutional and security threats have provided powerful incentives for the Court to put Brunson v. Adams on its dockets as a shield to deter any efforts by the lame duck Congress to infringe on the Court’s independence. Or perhaps conservatives on the Court are serious about using the Brunson case as a sword to remove public officials who they believe have violated their constitutional Oaths of office by rubber-stamping electors on Jan. 6th without first conducting any investigation of serious allegations of election fraud and foreign election interference.

Moreover, recent weeks have brought a cascade of news suggesting the likelihood of an impending constitutional crisis that could be difficult to resolve without the Court’s intervention

That “Cascade of news” is the Twitter Files and how the FBI was colluding with Big Tech to censor anything about the Hunter Biden laptop story.

It is now clear that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was colluding with social media giants Twitter and Facebook to censor news of Hunter Biden’s laptop in the weeks leading up to the 2020 election – a most egregious First Amendment violation intended to rig the election outcome and perhaps to install an unaccountable and criminal puppet government.

Meanwhile, the Jan. 6 committee may soon send a criminal referral to the Justice Department to arrest President Trump even though his reinstated tweets are a reminder that he was not calling for insurrection but for peaceful protest on Jan. 6.

Which they did. This post by Mr. Canova was posted on December 16^th.

More recently, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was reportedly working with Big Tech to censor election critics.

If you recall, the hashtag #StopTheSteal was suppressed and people using it were suspended or banned.

As the Brunson lawsuit argues, all of Congress was put on notice prior to its January 6th vote by more than a hundred of its own members detailing serious allegations of election frauds and calling for creation of an electoral commission to investigate the allegations.

And they were roundly ignored and belittled. So many in the Deep State and the Uniparty hated the Greatest President of the 21^st Century, Donald Trump, that they would do anything to get rid of him. One f the last potential backstops was Mike Pence. We saw how he handled things, and is basically a pariah with the Republican Base. (Not quite on the level of Liz Cheney of course. Pence does have a bit more class then she ever did)

There was also a requirement by the Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to submit a report on any foreign threats to the 2020 Presidential Election. It was supposed to have been submitted by December 18^th, but was not delivered.

In fact, DNI John Ratcliffe announced on that day that the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies he was overseeing had found evidence of foreign election interference but were split as to its significance and whether such breach of national security was sufficient to overturn the outcome of the election. And yet there was no action whatsoever by Congress, no inquiry and no investigation. Instead, Congress approved the possibly fraudulent election results on Jan. 6 without asking any questions of the DNI and the Intelligence Community.

And there is the reason for the case now in front of the Supreme Court. Congress should have immediately started investigating the possibility that foreign powers had gotten into the election system and potentially changed the results. We know that the voting and counting machines could be accessed over the internet, although they were supposed to be totally offline. Not only was this not looked into, anyone talking about it was attacked as an “Election Denier.” Now, there is a precedent for just such an investigation.

When the results of the 1876 presidential election were in doubt, Congress created a special Electoral Commission made up of five House members, five Senators, and five Supreme Court Justices to investigate.

I looked up the 1876 election, and according to that font of all knowledge, both accurate and “Are you kidding me?”, Wikipedia, it was an even bigger mess than the 2020 election. The ODNI report was delivered to Congress on January 7^th. The reason for the delay, according to DNI John Ratcliffe, was that the 17 Intelligence services looking into the whole thing did find foreign interference, but were split on whether or not it was sufficient to overturn the election.

I would add that most of those intelligence agencies and services wanted Trump out of office at any cost and didn’t care if there was a potential attack on our election by a hostile power. (If there was, it was probably China. They own Biden lock stock and barrel)

The Brunson lawsuit does not claim the election was stolen, merely that a large majority of Congress, by failing to investigate such serious allegations of election rigging and breaches of national security, violated their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic – an oath also taken by Supreme Court justices and members of the U.S. military.

While I can’t say with any certainty, I suspect that the plaintiffs not saying the election was stolen may have been the kicker with regards to the Supreme Court taking the case. I have no doubt there were other reasons as well, such as the Kangaroo Committee, aka The Get Trump Committee, aka The January 6^th Committee.

The fact that the Brunson case has made it to the Court’s docket suggests profound concerns about a lawless Jan. 6 congressional committee, politicized federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies and major constitutional violations intended to overthrow an elected government by manipulating the outcome of the presidential election.

Well, it will be an interesting case, especially of the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs. If you want to talk about a constitutional crisis, announcing that Joseph Biden, Kamala Harris and a large chunk of Congress are in office illegally, that would do it. Normally, the Line of Succession would move to the Speaker of the House, but as of now, December 22^nd, who that may be is in doubt, would be the next in line after Harris.

Then it moves to the Senate and the President Pro Tem. I believe that currently, this is Patrick “Leaky” Leahy, but he is retiring. Since most of the Senate could, theoretically be bounced, it would then move to the Cabinet. This is a problem, since President* Biden would have been removed, his nominations would probably be invalid and they would be bounced as well. There would be members of the House and Senate who were not removed, and those who were not in office at the time of the events in question.

If this does happen and the removals do occur, the line from All About Eve by Bette Davis comes to mind. “Buckle Up Boys, You’re In For A Bumpy Ride” Stay tuned boys and girls. If the worst/best case scenario happens, the Mostly Stupid Media is going to explode.

Thatisall

(5 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Loading...

~The Angry Webmaster~