I would like to add, if there is no penalty for making unconstitutional laws (treason), why have it at all?
We've seen how (((they))) make laws (guns, covid, illegals, etc.) that are obviously unconstitutional, knowing these edicts will be struck down eventually, then popping up with another, similar unconstitutional law. Rinse, repeat.
Why do we allow this? Are not these actions treasonous in the face of the constitution?
How about our new and improved House of Representatives propose and pass a law along the lines of "...any person associated with the passage of a law that is deemed unconstitutional shall be tried for the crime of treason against the people of the United States, and if convicted, shall be removed from their position (s) in government, shall have all their assets confiscated, and shall be imprisoned or executed...".
Sure, the Senate probably won't go along, and "The Biden" won't go along, but get these crooks on record as being in favor of treasonous activities.
Perhaps it will put a nagging doubt in the perpetrators minds, or at least in those aiding them.
And, make it retroactive! This has been done with tax laws, why not do it with this? Does treason have an expiration date?
Make the crime match the punishment. If you infringe on 360 million Americans constitutional rights, well your assets are forfeited to those you impacted. I will take Obama's Martha's Vineyard property and have all my fellow anons here at GAW over for our yearly celebration of the swamp drain.
I agree but the ones pushing those unconstitutional laws need to face a vote in Congress and be removed immediately not after their unconstitutional law is in the books and waiting on the challenge to move through the crooked court system.
The unconstitutional challenge should come when they are trying to pass the law and those pushing it should face removal from Congress. Do the same three times, and face automatic removal no matter what your colleagues / co-conspirators voted.
We have got to get a way to remove the cancer from our government faster once it is discovered.
Great question he asks rhetorically about oaths. Same goes for laws. What good are they if they can be so easily broken??? If this case makes it, we gotta expect a LOT of change. Fingers crossed
The brothers needs to debullshit this case by removing the remedy they’re asking for: removing duly elected members of the legislative and/or executive branch.
Only the Congress and the voters can do that according to the Constitution.
How long do you think Trump would’ve last as POTUS if the SCOTUS could remove him?
Remove the remedy from this case, and it might have a standing.
A rehearing petition is now accepted, filed, docketed by SCOTUS, the new conference date is February 17. Hence, "we the people" with your letters will show SCOTUS the desperately needed support for a victorious outcome!
This case is in a new appeal process, Regardless of your previous letters, show SCOTUS your support and continue to send letters so they know this case matters! Here's what to do Send a letter or We'll send one for you. If you’d like to mail your own letter to the Supreme Court, please follow the instructions in the ‘Send Your Own Letter’ column below.
If you’d like us to create, print and send your signed letter, we need your help to cover our printing, fulfillment and postage costs. It’s not much, but we’re receiving thousands of requests and need you to chip in to make this work.
Step 1) Send us your gift, we accept all credit cards.
Step 2) Fill in your Name, Email and Return Address. Your letter will be batched and printed in our next shipment to SCOTUS.
Because it’s asking the SCOTUS to go against the Constitution.
The B brothers are asking the SCOTUS to unseat elected members from the executive and legislative branches, only the Congress or the voters can do that.
This case has no standing because they’re asking the SCOTUS to go against the Constitution.
You claimed that SCOTUS cannot unseat elected members. It can be done. As to whether failing to do their job merits unseating, that is a gray area. You don't get to decide for them, however.
Under Article I, Section 5, clause 2, of the Constitution, a Member of Congress may be removed from office before the normal expiration of his or her constitutional term by an “expulsion” from the Senate (if a Senator) or from the House of Representatives (if a Representative) upon a formal vote on a resolution agreed to by two-thirds of the Members of that body present and voting.
So a member of the Congress can be remove if he resigns, dies, is voted out by his constituents or an expulsion from office voted by his peers.
The SCOTUS can never remove an elected member.
Hold your breath, and see how well this case works out.
The courts have repeatedly asked the Brunson brothers to give reason why the defendants broke their oaths and what gives them the right to bring this case over say a leftist who wanted to sue trump for the same idea. The Brunson brothers continue to just say "remove them because they broke their oaths" "they broke their oaths because they did something we dont like" "its a national security issue cuz biden bad" like literally all of this said by the other side about our own people, is that really a precedent we want?
The core of their case was flawed as congress doesnt have to investigate shit, they approve the electorical votes and thats it per the constitution (otherwise why would have trump been president at all if the ds controlled congress when he was elected, the seneate could have just said no and be done eith it)
Guess we should shut up about biden then right? Because "Cant say anything nice dont say anything at all" you see how silly that is?
The Brunson Brothers are actively trying to get money and fame by running PR for a case that will NEVER have any results. Im at least here trying to help people see through the grift.
This at last speaks to the true crux of the Brunson case. What is the value of an Oath of Office? Who are these people who in spoken word claim to represent "us," the citizenry of America, ACTUALLY representing and putting forth the agenda of?
This more fundamental question at the heart of the Brunson case is what TRULY DESERVES Constitutional scrutiny and an answer that will be clear for the American people to know. Full stop.
Seems like he wants to make everyone pay through the nose by hiring expensive attorneys for everything. The Brunson brothers know what they are doing. We all have standing when elections are fraudulent.
I would like to add, if there is no penalty for making unconstitutional laws (treason), why have it at all?
We've seen how (((they))) make laws (guns, covid, illegals, etc.) that are obviously unconstitutional, knowing these edicts will be struck down eventually, then popping up with another, similar unconstitutional law. Rinse, repeat.
Why do we allow this? Are not these actions treasonous in the face of the constitution?
How about our new and improved House of Representatives propose and pass a law along the lines of "...any person associated with the passage of a law that is deemed unconstitutional shall be tried for the crime of treason against the people of the United States, and if convicted, shall be removed from their position (s) in government, shall have all their assets confiscated, and shall be imprisoned or executed...".
Sure, the Senate probably won't go along, and "The Biden" won't go along, but get these crooks on record as being in favor of treasonous activities.
Perhaps it will put a nagging doubt in the perpetrators minds, or at least in those aiding them.
And, make it retroactive! This has been done with tax laws, why not do it with this? Does treason have an expiration date?
I like this proposal.
Make the crime match the punishment. If you infringe on 360 million Americans constitutional rights, well your assets are forfeited to those you impacted. I will take Obama's Martha's Vineyard property and have all my fellow anons here at GAW over for our yearly celebration of the swamp drain.
We will also make it a National Holiday
We'll call it Q Day in honor of u/QDay
I agree but the ones pushing those unconstitutional laws need to face a vote in Congress and be removed immediately not after their unconstitutional law is in the books and waiting on the challenge to move through the crooked court system.
The unconstitutional challenge should come when they are trying to pass the law and those pushing it should face removal from Congress. Do the same three times, and face automatic removal no matter what your colleagues / co-conspirators voted.
We have got to get a way to remove the cancer from our government faster once it is discovered.
If the lower courts kicked out this case, then they too broke their oaths.
Stop noticing things!
Very clever! I like that...minus the retroactive part. Thanks for sharing your great idea. It would work.
You're welcome.
Great question he asks rhetorically about oaths. Same goes for laws. What good are they if they can be so easily broken??? If this case makes it, we gotta expect a LOT of change. Fingers crossed
Basically anything in this Wikipedia article should disappear:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government
The brothers needs to debullshit this case by removing the remedy they’re asking for: removing duly elected members of the legislative and/or executive branch.
Only the Congress and the voters can do that according to the Constitution.
How long do you think Trump would’ve last as POTUS if the SCOTUS could remove him?
Remove the remedy from this case, and it might have a standing.
Genesis flood started on the 17th day of the second month.
Brother, it's beginning to rain.
https://www.bible.com/bible/406/GEN.7.11-24.ERV
love it
it will be biblical
What an incredible post.
Salute to you
Brunsons have made it EASY. No excuses. DO IT!
https://brunsonbrothers.com/scotus-petition/
A rehearing petition is now accepted, filed, docketed by SCOTUS, the new conference date is February 17. Hence, "we the people" with your letters will show SCOTUS the desperately needed support for a victorious outcome!
This case is in a new appeal process, Regardless of your previous letters, show SCOTUS your support and continue to send letters so they know this case matters! Here's what to do Send a letter or We'll send one for you. If you’d like to mail your own letter to the Supreme Court, please follow the instructions in the ‘Send Your Own Letter’ column below.
If you’d like us to create, print and send your signed letter, we need your help to cover our printing, fulfillment and postage costs. It’s not much, but we’re receiving thousands of requests and need you to chip in to make this work.
Step 1) Send us your gift, we accept all credit cards.
Step 2) Fill in your Name, Email and Return Address. Your letter will be batched and printed in our next shipment to SCOTUS.
17… kek
Not only is it on the 17th, but the digits in 2-17-2023 add up to... 17.
Sure...drop a zero so the math works.... ; )
Leading zeros are racist.
That’s right
The case needs to be actually read before it gets voted on. The SCOTUS didn't even pick it the last time to be read when it was in conference.
Because it’s asking the SCOTUS to go against the Constitution.
The B brothers are asking the SCOTUS to unseat elected members from the executive and legislative branches, only the Congress or the voters can do that.
This case has no standing because they’re asking the SCOTUS to go against the Constitution.
Either they’re dumb, or they’re grifters.
If the Supreme Court can't unseat members elected by fraud, you might as well throw away the constitution.
And yet here we are.
This case isn’t asking to remove congress members because of fraud.
They’re asking to remove members because they “broke their oath”.
You claimed that SCOTUS cannot unseat elected members. It can be done. As to whether failing to do their job merits unseating, that is a gray area. You don't get to decide for them, however.
I still stand by that claim.
Under Article I, Section 5, clause 2, of the Constitution, a Member of Congress may be removed from office before the normal expiration of his or her constitutional term by an “expulsion” from the Senate (if a Senator) or from the House of Representatives (if a Representative) upon a formal vote on a resolution agreed to by two-thirds of the Members of that body present and voting. So a member of the Congress can be remove if he resigns, dies, is voted out by his constituents or an expulsion from office voted by his peers. The SCOTUS can never remove an elected member.
You are probably right. This will be another nothing burger.
Hold your breath, and see how well this case works out.
The courts have repeatedly asked the Brunson brothers to give reason why the defendants broke their oaths and what gives them the right to bring this case over say a leftist who wanted to sue trump for the same idea. The Brunson brothers continue to just say "remove them because they broke their oaths" "they broke their oaths because they did something we dont like" "its a national security issue cuz biden bad" like literally all of this said by the other side about our own people, is that really a precedent we want?
The core of their case was flawed as congress doesnt have to investigate shit, they approve the electorical votes and thats it per the constitution (otherwise why would have trump been president at all if the ds controlled congress when he was elected, the seneate could have just said no and be done eith it)
IMHO the brothers are either dumb or grifters.
This case lacks standing because they’re asking the SCOTUS to go against the Constitution by removing elected members of the two other branches.
They’re making a fortune off this, when even a foreigner without any education in law can see that this case is bullshit.
Careful who you follow. Q
They certainly are making a fortune. AFAIK from reading the SC docs... They are self representing!
One heck of a money funnel going on with this one.
How does self representing to the SC make you money ? You sound like a paid shill to me.
If the Supreme Court can't unseat members elected by fraud, you might as well throw away the constitution.
Guess we should shut up about biden then right? Because "Cant say anything nice dont say anything at all" you see how silly that is?
The Brunson Brothers are actively trying to get money and fame by running PR for a case that will NEVER have any results. Im at least here trying to help people see through the grift.
This at last speaks to the true crux of the Brunson case. What is the value of an Oath of Office? Who are these people who in spoken word claim to represent "us," the citizenry of America, ACTUALLY representing and putting forth the agenda of?
This more fundamental question at the heart of the Brunson case is what TRULY DESERVES Constitutional scrutiny and an answer that will be clear for the American people to know. Full stop.
Katie Hobbs think the constitution is a joke.
Let's GOOOO!!!!
Not a problem fren
Hopefully, we're not walking ourselves into a trap where they decide there's no real need for any of these things after all.
But I'm a cynic that way.
There's a lot of good ideas in this thread.
None of them will amount to a hill of beans as long as women have the vote.
Two more years. Try to keep up. We're just now starting the "4th quarter".
u/#q3387
He is a doomer. He has a long rap sheet to prove it. Don't take my word on it, just read his history. We here already see it.
Are you?
Seems like he wants to make everyone pay through the nose by hiring expensive attorneys for everything. The Brunson brothers know what they are doing. We all have standing when elections are fraudulent.