What Raland J Brunson v. Alma S. Adams is Really About

What Happened 

On January 6, 2021, the 117th Congress held a proceeding in Washington DC for the purpose of determining the votes in the 2020 presidential election and certifying the results for the President and Vice President of the United States under Amendment XII.

During this proceeding over 100 members of U.S. Congress claimed they had factual evidence that the 2020 elections were rigged. 

Pres. Biden, Harris, former V.P. Pence and 385 members of Congress broke their oath to protect the Constitution by voting AGAINST the proposition that came from members of Congress to investigate the claims that there were enemies of the Constitution who successfully rigged the election.

Failing to investigate the matter demonstrates the Respondents “adhered” to the enemy, which is treason, and their inaction unilaterally violated the rights of every citizen of the U.S.

The Cases

The Plaintiffs have two cases.  The first one was filed by Loy Brunson and is still held up in the Utah Federal Court. 

However, an identical case was filed by his brother with the US Supreme Court, bypassing the previous 10th circuit court of appeals, by filing it under Rule 11, stating that the case falls under the category of a National Emergency. 

Rule 11. Certiorari to a United States Court of Appeals before Judgment

A petition for a writ of certiorari to review a case pending in a United States court of appeals, before judgment is entered in that court, will be granted only upon a showing that the case is of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this Court. See 28 U. S. C. § 2101(e).

Why This is a Historic U.S. Supreme Court Case

  • The case involves the possible removal of a sitting President and Vice President of the United States along with 388 members of the United States Congress and Mike Pence.
  • The Respondents were properly warned and were requested to make an investigation into a highly covert swift and powerful enemy, seeking to destroy the constitution in the United States of America.
  • Congress failed in their Constitutional duties by ignoring the protection of critical infrastructure (election systems) during a National Emergency.
  • US courts have consistently held that fraud vitiates everything (US v Throckmorton, 1878).
  • The refusal of the respondents to investigate the Congressional claim there was an enemy undermining the elections is an act of treason and fraud by the Respondents.
  • The successful manipulation of US elections constitutes an act of war. (#1 Link)  

We have discussed before that Trump declared a national emergency September 12, 2018, by Executive Order 13848, with respect to “foreign interference in or undermining public confidence in United States elections,” which would cover the 2020 elections.  (#2 Link)  

We have also discussed Biden kept that order in play for another year beginning September 7, 2022 which would cover the mid terms.   (#3 Link) 

When the Supreme Court received their petition, they called the Brunson brothers and told them they would review the case and they set a conference on January 6, where the 9 Justices in conference will vote on whether or not to move forward to a hearing.  Only 4 of the 9 votes are needed to proceed.

The fact that this case has gotten this far, this fast, is extremely unusual.

If the Supreme Court has a hearing and finds the Defendants failed to live up to their constitutional duties, i.e. “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic . . .,”  the U.S. Supreme Court has the right to both adjudicate and execute their findings.  In other words, it is within U.S. Supreme Court’s providence to personally throw these people out of office.

The fact that they overturned Roe v Wade shows they are willing to go “where angels fear to tread.”

With this case, they just may go there again. 

#1  https://www.newstreason.com/post/supreme-court-brunson-v-alma-s-adams-et-al-case-summary-and-timeline

#2  https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-13848-imposing-certain-sanctions-the-event-foreign-interference-united 

#3  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/09/07/notice-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-foreign-interference-in-or-undermining-public-confidence-in-united-states-elections-2/

Comments

  1. Don’t hold your breath. Cowards remain cowards. They had their chance with the Texas suit they dismissed for standing. It’s not about the facts or the law.

    It’s about fear.

  2. The night of the 2020 election, the title of a book came to mind and wouldn’t leave. The title? “The Once and Future King”. For some reason, it just seemed to me that there would be a time when all the lying and the crime comes out, but it wasn’t going to be quick. But how it would trigger all the crybabies if Trump was reinstated after Jan 20, 2023 and was able to run for a third term. Wouldn’t that make their heads explode?
    That being said, my “assignment” is not to hang out on Telegram with the other keyboard warriors who want it to happen. I’m not saying that it will, but *should* it happen, it’s imperative that each one of us is already going about our own worthwhile business, otherwise it won’t “stick”.

    Christ is Born!

    • Gail Sheppard says

      The crybabies will be furious. They’ll think we somehow stole it from them!

      Glorify Him!

    • Christ – you are a f[…]ing moron. Trump lost. Get over it snowflake.

      • George Michalopulos says

        Seriously? The fact that your entire argument is the gerund of the vulgar word for copulation is what I mean about the “dam getting ready to break.”

        I won’t play that game (and I really shouldn’t even try) but here goes: are you aware that there are scores of Third-World banana republics around the world in which the legitimate winner has the election stolen from him?

  3. Michael Bauman says

    One of Shakespeare’s plays is Julius Caesar. The characters, plot and Soliques all fit this “real life” situation. Especially Marc Anthony’s Oration at Caesar’s funeral and the earlier one right after Caesar’s murder:

    https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/56968/speech-friends-romans-countrymen-lend-me-your-ears

    https://nosweatshakespeare.com/quotes/famous/cry-havoc-let-slip-dogs-war/

    The evil to be avoided here is chaos. It seems that whatever the outcome, Chaos is what we have until Soros speaks… Or perhaps he liken’s himself to the Lord of Chaos. https://www.askqotd.com/greek-mythology-and-chaos/#:~:text=In%20Greek%20mythology%2C%20Chaos%20was,gods%20of%20darkness%20and%20night.

    But he would have to have a sex change before embodying her. Maybe that’s why all the trans stuff is hitting the fan.
    Trying to make Chaos, incarnate in a counterfeit
    way.
    Only following the Incarnate Lord allows us to escape the Chaos, i.e. sin, in our hearts and minds snd bodies.
    Lust of Power and personification of worldly ideology in “leaders”

  4. Praying that after 50 years of prayers, God is returning America to its rightful owners – We The People – by overturning Roe and rounding up Haman and his gang for the demise they planned for us – the story of Ester. Praise God in any case.

    https://thememorials.org/

  5. Let us suppose that this case is resolved by the Supreme Court in the plaintiffs’ favor. Let us further suppose that the Supreme Court actually orders the removal of all appointed and elected public officials involved.

    I have a modest question.

    Who will actually enforce this?

    The Justice Department? Don’t make me laugh!

    The military? Methinks not. After all, the top brass and flag officers are either “woke” or corrupted by defense contractor money.

    U.S. Marshals? Although the Marshals report to the Court, there aren’t enough of them to make such a ruling stick.

    The traitors own the media, the Federal Government and all the enforcement agencies. Therefore, this case does not matter. Nothing will be done, no matter how it plays out.

    Sorry to rain on everyone’s parade, but that is how I see things.

    • Gail Sheppard says

      The media has nothing to do with this. Like overturning Roe V Wade, the law is the law. This is an unusual case because the Supreme Court is able to adjudicate and execute their decisions if it impacts national security. I would imagine they will have agents at their doors before they make their announcement if they go that direction.

      • In re:

        This is an unusual case because the Supreme Court is able to adjudicate and execute their decisions if it impacts national security

        .

        How? By tapping on their little toy hammers? What if no one else in Washington pays attention?

        I would imagine they will have agents at their doors before they make their announcement if they go that direction.

        What agents? From what agency? They are all compromised.

        As Shakespeare says in his play Henry IV:

        Glendower: I can call the spirits from the vasty deep!
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come, when you do call for them?

    • Sound wisdom Michael. As DOJ/FBI ignores Joe and Hunter’s deals with CCP and Ukraine, while rifling through Trump attorneys and associates’ offices. So obviously, there is no way on earth these criminal perverts, all guilty of high treason, can be brought to justice and America returned to its rightful owners, We The People – no earthly hope.

      And yet, there is a joyful confidence glimmering in the darkness among a small minority – that if it were God’s will to answer the repentant prayers of those called by His name, He could do it – and in such a way the glory would be His alone. Like the parting of the Red Sea to bring His children out of bondage.

    • Michele klemetson says

      Remember it’s already gotten this far, and that alone is amazing! So something is up. Do you think the fear of nuclear war has now scared them enough to initiate change?

    • “We the People”. Veterans and fellow Americans best be prepared to take up arms if SCOTUS orders them removed and they aren’t.

    • Samuel H Gillespie says

      To Michael says: December 29, 2022 at 5:22 pm. Well, sometime before Ft. Sumter, one senator attacked another in the capitol with a cane and brutally mauled the victim. There are several possible outcomes if the plaintiffs are vindicated; also, quite a few if they are not. Still, I would not be surprised at the outbreak of violence, major or minor.

  6. This is a MIRACLE case. I believe God will strengthen the Justices and give them the courage to rule in favor of the plaintiff. We need military support, including retired generals and we further need to take control over the media. God does miracles everyday and this is one that will touch the whole world and ultimately bring us back to Him. Praise the LORD!

  7. I am hopeful if not naive. Another consideration, according to Loy, is the Justices may be using this case as a means to defend against rash moves by liberals in congress who are threatening to pack the court as well as impose term limits.
    Also according to Loy, in the other voter fraud case to reach the SC, Justices’ Roberts, Thomas, and Alito, voted to accept. Ironically, all three of the recent Trump appointees (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett) voted to dismiss, perhaps due to not wanting to look like Trump lapdogs. It only takes 4 justices to accept a case.
    I pray.

    • Gail Sheppard says

      I recall Loy saying this might be a byproduct of the case, but it would be pretty extreme to throw out a sitting president, vice president and all of congress to defend against potential “rash moves, etc.” in the future.

      This isn’t about voter fraud, either.

      It’s about Congress receiving 100 legitimate congressional concerns about the election process and them failing to investigate which is a violation of their oath.

  8. Chet Diamond says

    I can’t see 4 judges accepting this case, given they wouldn’t hear the Texas case in 2020 when many thought they would, but if they do I can see them ordering an investigation as “remedy” before ever removing all the politicians called for by the complaint. It’d be miraculous if they did remove them all however, but maybe its time for another miracle (the last, imo, being Hillary’s defeat in 2016).

    • Gail Sheppard says

      They only need 4 out of 9 to move it forward. (Sorry about the late edit. Having some problems with the site.)

    • If they were to accept the case, wouldn’t
      the hearing of the case of be the investigation?

      • Not a lawyer. But they are there to make a decision on weather the members violated their oath by not following the basic rules? Punishment is in the Constitution?

        • As I understand it, SCOTUS is to decide
          whether or not they will hear the case concerning
          whether or not the members violated their oaths.

          • Gail Sheppard says

            Yes. The chose January 6 to meet to discuss it which is kind of interesting.

            • They also went out of their way to ensure
              that the plea was properly formulated;
              which is also kind of interesting…

              • Gail Sheppard says

                They did, and the case is so far reaching and so unusual, it’s hard to imagine them wanting to even touch it. However, everything we’ve been experiencing these last few years has been “far reaching and unusual” and not just in the U.S. but around the world.

                And there is this:

                Article I, Section 5, of the United States Constitution provides that “Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.” Since 1789, the Senate has expelled only fifteen of its entire membership.” What if it decides not to “expel” anyone, ignoring a Supreme Court order if it comes to that? If they can hear 100 complaints and not investigate, maybe they can ignore the Supreme Court, too.

                Also, Congress can override decisions with “tweaks” that can be passed on an individual basis, as part of larger omnibus bills, or even tacked on to unrelated appropriations or debt ceiling bills. Most of the legislation necessary to overturn these decisions is short: just a few lines to reinforce congressional intent in a way that the judiciary can’t touch it. They could just legislate the Supreme Court out of the picture.

                Then there is sovereign immunity. The government cannot be sued without its consent. The Brunson’s did sue them in a lower court which I understand after dragging their feet forever, immediately came up with a decision when the Supreme Court got involved and suggested they use Rule 11 where you don’t have to go through a lower court if it concerns a national emergency. Does the previous decision impact anything? Maybe not because the decision, I believe, came after the case was filed with the Supreme Court and it’s not an appeal.

                And then there are people out there like this who are loaded for bear the second the wind changes: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/19/trump-joe-biden-coronavirus-polls?link_id=6&can_id=4a3267c2ab5beb15695559cd61cf42a9&source=email-what-if-theres-a-coup&email_referrer=email_909768&email_subject=what-if-theres-a-coup These people aren’t going to go away. They’ll start a civil war if they have to, especially if it puts Trump back where he was.

                It’s possible the Supreme Court is taking this case so Congress can’t be removed from office. Maybe the Supreme Court is going to rule in their favor. I hate to be that cynical but I don’t trust anyone at this point.

                If Congress is at all worried, they’re not showing it. Maybe they already have a plan to push legislation to impose term limits and a mandatory retirement age for justices, and thereby open the door to packing the Court. – Whatever they’re planning to do, they seem pretty confident it will work. The MSM isn’t talking about it and neither are they.

                This is an interesting article. Canova says, “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.”
                https://highlandcountypress.com/Content/Opinions/Opinion/Article/Supreme-Court-considers-Brunson-v-Adams/4/22/86700

                You can’t dismiss 100 concerns without at least an investigation unless you’re prepared to go all the way and move right into a dictatorship. This guy is talking about Tribunals which I have long suspected are already happening because the military doesn’t have any rules but its own if we’re under martial law and just don’t know it. This might be the case. (Actually, I honestly believe it is the case.) And it may be the only way out because I could see some of them ignoring the Supreme Court like they ignored their oaths.

                Nothing would surprise me at this point.

  9. The supreme court will not hear this case. It’s nonsense.

  10. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385

    18 USC 2385 makes it a serious crime to advocate the overthrow of the government. However, SCOTUS has severely restricted the application of such laws. Gentle readers may benefit from a review of the following, given the strong emotions of the current times:

    https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1/does-the-first-amendment-protect-speech-that-advocates-illegal-c.html

    Brandenburg v. Ohio is the controlling case on the subject and seems to indicate that prosecution for advocating the overthrow of the government must be a call to a particular type of action:

    “. . . constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” – https://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme-court-insights/brandenburg-v–ohio–permissible-restrictions-on-violent-speech.html

    Nonetheless, I personally refrain from any public statement explicitly advocating the violent overthrow of the government. In light of the J6 political prisoner situation, it is not clear what this lawless regime is capable of. That does not mean that I am condemning any such sentiments, only that I will not publicly advocate them. I suggest that commenters exercise a modicum of restraint in this regard.

  11. “What the United States is going to go through is civil conflict, civil war, and then invasion.We will go through a dramatic change in our government and there would be a time of anarchy and chaos.
    The time were in would be a time of dramatic changes in governments around the world, great political turmoil, and wars.

Trackbacks

  1. […] case described on the Monomakhos website has been added to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket. The court pleadings are as […]

Speak Your Mind

*