To be blunt… GAME OVER.
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (50)
sorted by:
Someone asked @SharonSaysSo about Marbury v Madison today. Her answer got me to thinking about this case. The Supreme Court rarely goes the full way on an initial ruling. So the Brunson brothers are focusing on the oath of office. I think the focus of this case may be on ruling on the importance of the oath of office. I agree. I don’t see how they get rid of the legislative branch except by the military coming forward and saying the whole govt is unconstitutional and we need all new elections.
Funny how there is now a push by the 17th SOG, Juan O Savin to get patriots to run for local offices… Just in time for all new elections everywhere?
It’s a bullshit case.
The remedy they’re asking for (SCOTUS to remove duly elected members of Congress) is something the SCOTUS is prohibited from doing according to your Constitution. Only the Congress itself, or the voters, can unseat elected members.
We should be happy that the SCOTUS aren’t allowed to remove senators, representatives or the POTUS/VP.
Trump wouldn’t have lasted 10 seconds in the WH if this was a possibility.
As I said, this case is bullshit because the remedy they’re asking for goes against the Constitution.
Well, I have seen a lot since 1/20/2021 that I never expected to see happen: a military funeral gun salute at a Presidential inauguration, a “President” arriving at Andrews in a dirty Suburban with the Secret Service wearing jeans, a fake White House set in the old Executive building, Biden showing a silicone mask tab on his ear at a 9/11 ceremony, not to mention a heck of a lot of other of not-easily explained happenings.
We are in uncharted territory. So maybe we will see something else that isn’t easily explained.
They aren’t prohibited. Fraud vitiates everything. Courts have ruled people were not duly elected before. They also ruled against corrupt politicians.
If the SCOTUS rules that members of Congress are not duly elected, the Congress itself will have to remove those members.
However this is not the remedy the B brothers is asking for, they want the SCOTUS to do the unseating themself.
Which is strictly prohibited.
The Brunson case is not about the cheating, it’s about not investigating the cheating, and breaking their oath not doing it.
This is a bullshit case that lacks standing, and even a 5 year old can see it.
The Brunson are grifters, and have made a fortune out of this case.
How did they make a fortune off this case? Show me some receipts.
Where is it prohibited?
I don’t have any reason to not consider it as you have. Perhaps they could rule on the constitutionality of breaking the oath and afterward they would be prosecuted locally in their home towns.
Probably military is the only way but this could be in tandem along with Durham. Maybe the perfect storm would kick start the open military action?!