What is this thread all about?
Just a place for general discussion. A place to unload whats on your mind and talk about anything - personal, health, help needed, achievements, daily highs and daily lows, theories, predictions and what have you.
Does not need to be Q related.
What is going on with this forum ? Why is nobody talking about the Brunson case before the Supreme Court ?
Search feature is easy to use. Like for example: this search will tell you that we have been discussing the case.
I did a search, and the discussion was pretty meager with all the recent info coming from Loy Brunson.
https://rumble.com/v1xi6vh-juan-o-savin-112722-video-b.html
This could be the big enchilada. Or not, depending on the whether the SC just wants to threaten Congress rather than go on the offensive.
That video was posted when it came out. I know its the big enchilada, but my belief is that (based on the Jan 6th date) it is currently being used as an insurance policy to ensure the current congress does not do anything nasty before they retire.
Will this case be used to arrest the congress and senate? This definitely wont happen before the current congress ends, and it does not make sense to use it after the new congress takes their place.
But is this the big enchilada - definitely. However, its place in the movie will be more towards the end, when declas is in full force and people are sick and demand to hold some of the congressmen/senators into account.
There was some post about it in the past week. I had copied one of the post and sent it to all my friends. From what I heard with Juan O Savin the case was accepted. It’s scheduled for January 6, 2023.
This should be easily verified by the SC's own publications.
Edit:
Incorrect. It has NOT been accepted for a hearing. It has been accepted to the docket (it has been docketed) which by and large has nothing to do with the virtues of the case. Being docketed simply means that the clerks of the court have accepted registration of the case as one that the court will CONSIDER whether to take or not (whether to move to an actual hearing or not).
On the docket, it shows it has been "distributed for conference", meaning the court will discuss it on Jan 6 and decide IF it warrants a hearing or not - whether they will hold an actual hearing it or not.
Docket:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-380.html
Note: We don't have to always simply accept what people say, but easy basic research can be done to actually find out for ourselves. That's actually what Q exhorted anons to do, while also emphasizing "be careful who you follow"!!
Thanks for the correction, I appreciate it. However; my days are filled with responsibilities so my research time is very limited, that’s why I check in here. So far I haven’t found Juan to be an unreliable source, at least not what I’ve heard from him.
I think you probably just misinterpreted what Osavin said.
Regarding Osavin, in my view, the jury is still out, but I am not a fan. He has some interesting content/views, but I don't feel drawn to him in the way I do to other (what I consider) very solid and beneficial sources.
The Brunson case has been proffered to the SC, but last I heard, it has not been accepted (yet).
I personally don't think it will amount to much, if anything. If the SC had been positioned to uphold their oaths..... then....
But we'll see. I think there have been SOME posts and discussion on the topic, but I suspect that collectively, most think/feel its not the big deal that some think it is...
But if the SC was not going to accept it, why did they push it ? They are treating this case like no other. They wield the sword of Damocles over Congress. I think it will come to a head during this lame duck Congress. They can hear it at any time they want, and they are waiting for something to happen. Probably Trump's arrest.
PS. The case has been docketed and will be distributed for conference on Jan 6. This means, that on Jan 6 the court will discuss in private whether the case merits going forward to a hearing, or whether the court will simply decline to hear it.
If they ACCEPT to hear it, that would be a big deal. But that is a HUGE if.
From the Brunson's own website.
About SC distributing cases for conference:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/casedistribution/casedistributionschedule.aspx
The actual court docket:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-380.html
Um, this is ambiguous. Who is "they" here?
Cases can be docketed with the SC which means they are on a list for the SC to look at and decide whether or not they will hear the case. As far as I know, there has been no decision on that point yet, but maybe I'm wrong. The point, however, is that getting on the docket does not mean that the SC will hear the case. It's just a first step necessary for them to consider whether or not they will hear it.
The SC did not "push" this case in any way, did they? Or are you saying they delayed making a determination on whether they will hear it or not?
Either way, I am simply offering a response to why perhaps the frens on the board are not making as big a deal of this as you seem to think is warranted.
Loy Brunson said that the Clerk of the Supreme Court contacted them and gave them pointers on how to amend the case to make it more likely to succeed and asked them to speed up the process.
He explains it in this video; https://rumble.com/v1xi6vh-juan-o-savin-112722-video-b.html