I keep saying, Brunson case was a insurance policy against stealing the House from MAGA. Now that the house is safe, the case will be put on ice, to be resurrected as necessary, until, I predict, it will be in play at the very end, when we hit the precipice.
A lot of their perspective stems from the understanding of how SCOTUS works and what their specific actions mean, and not as much on the facts of the matter.
I do agree that we wont see any major bomb drop - atleast not until the end.
But I do not agree that this case is inconsequential - I believe it (or one of their related cases) has already played a role and will keep playing a role in guiding the Congress's actions up until the precipice.
I keep saying, Brunson case was a insurance policy against stealing the House from MAGA. Now that the house is safe, the case will be put on ice, to be resurrected as necessary, until, I predict, it will be in play at the very end, when we hit the precipice.
What are your thoughts on the Tracey Beanz / Inside DC perspective on the Brunson Case?
A lot of their perspective stems from the understanding of how SCOTUS works and what their specific actions mean, and not as much on the facts of the matter.
I do agree that we wont see any major bomb drop - atleast not until the end.
But I do not agree that this case is inconsequential - I believe it (or one of their related cases) has already played a role and will keep playing a role in guiding the Congress's actions up until the precipice.
Thanks BB.