Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester and Grow
http://thefogbow.com/forum/
That is some authentic frontier gibberish.northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 1:44 pm Here is the, um, petition.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 000251.pdf
Dr. Caligari wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 11:52 pmnorthland10 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 1:44 pm Here is the, um, petition.
That is some authentic frontier gibberish.
Putting it nicely. Wow.Dr. Caligari wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 11:52 pmThat is some authentic frontier gibberish.northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 1:44 pm Here is the, um, petition.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 000251.pdf
Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson
all voted against the hearing of Raland's US Supreme Court Case #22-380.
We have created a letter that will be sent on your behalf.
If you are willing pay for the postage and handling, we'll make sure the court gets it!
Yes! We want the Federal Court flooded with letters from "We The People."
We believe that if the Court gets enough letters, they will give this case the attention it deserves!
Thank You!
HERE IS THE LETTER
The Letter
Dear Honorable Jared C. Bennett,
I have reason to believe that the defendants of this case, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who are current Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, broke their oath of office by voting against hearing the Raland J Brunson's case docket #22-380 of the US Supreme Court.
This case, docket #22-380 is about Pres. Biden, V.P. Harris and then V.P. Mike Pence, and 385 members of congress including House Speaker Pelosi, who thwarted the proposed investigation into the allegations that there was interference in the 2020 Presidential election.
I urge you to give these three defendants an opportunity to explain and defend themselves as to why they thought it was important to vote against the hearing of the said Raland J Brunson case. Let this case move forward. Let me along with "We the People" know that this court will protect the US Constitution by allowing the defendants to answer the Complaint.
Respectfully and in Honor,
(Your name will be here)
Super catchy song, was not expecting it. Well done. Looks like you have to watch the video version on YouTube, there's nothing controversial about it, don't know why. Here's the audio version:You don't sniff petrol from a can
You put your petrol in the car it stays
Don't be rama rama it's messing with your brains
How Democrats can get SCOTUS in line—without the Judiciary Committee
Roberts had to know there were more shoes to drop in the seemingly endless Thomas-Crow affair. ProPublica delivers, with a new story alleging that the Texas billionaire and big GOP donor paid at least several years of private school tuition for Thomas’ ward, a grandnephew he took in at age 6. That’s on top of the lavish gifts, yachting trips, and private jet flights—and the fact that Crow is Thomas’ mother’s landlord, gifting her free rent after buying the home from Thomas. You know that Thomas knows how stinky all that largesse from Crow is by the fact that he kept it all secret, failing to disclose any of it. Even when he was declaring another $5,000 gift from someone else to pay for his nephew’s education, Thomas was keeping his sugar daddy Crow a secret.
But as long as Sen. Dianne Feinstein remains absent because of a health problem, Sen. Dick Durbin’s Judiciary Committee is stymied from doing anything about it. So Democrats on other committees are stepping up, and they’re starting where it counts: the power of the purse. The court operates on funds approved and provided by Congress, which gives Congress the power to make demands.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen says he’s looking “at all the options” for imposing reforms on the court. The Maryland Democrat chairs the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Subcommittee, the one in charge of the Supreme Court budget. Fifteen of Van Hollen’s Democratic colleagues, including six who sit on the Judiciary Committee, wrote to him at the end of March—even before some of the blockbuster stories about Thomas broke—asking him to withhold $10 million of the court’s funding unless it adopted an ethics code.
The demand is not an unusual one. Federal courts have ruled that “it is completely appropriate and proper for the legislative branch to use the power of the purse to influence the other branches in doing what they ought to be doing.” It happens all the time with the executive branch, and the co-equal judicial branch isn’t an exception.
That’s one avenue Senate Democrats can use for exposing the problem at the court—the problem Roberts refuses to acknowledge—but it’s not the only path. Sen. Ron Wyden, who chairs the Finance Committee, opened another. He asked Thomas’ patron, Harlan Crow, for a detailed accounting of all the gifts, travel, and real estate deals he’s provided Thomas.
Wyden’s committee oversees the Internal Revenue Service, and that’s the implicit threat behind his request: The court might not require that Thomas disclose all these gifts, but the tax code “provides no such exceptions for transfers of a gratuitous or personal nature.” Congress can get those tax records to find out if Crow is following tax law. While Wyden didn’t explicitly make that threat or open an official investigation, he has the power to do it.
The slim majority Democrats have in the Senate—even slimmer without Feinstein’s vote—makes it harder for them to act. But every time they threaten to use their power, it puts Republicans on the defensive.
It’s a good tactic, and it’s working. Here’s Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn's admission that there’s a problem with the lavish gifts Thomas accepted:
“Well, that's why I say that I think the Court would do well to consider this experience in coming up with perhaps some additional reforms, but this is not something, an appropriate role for Congress.”
It’s weak, but it’s movement. He’s no longer denying that the court has a problem. That’s why Democrats have to keep up the drumbeat.
TL;DRL.This song is a parody based on the old "Sixteen Tons" song written by Tennessee Ernie Ford. Written by Loy Brunson and sung by Merrill Osmond.
Holy moly. What a bunch of crap.bob wrote: ↑Wed May 17, 2023 8:00 pm Raland's opposition to three justices' government's motion to dismiss.
Nothing, like you've seen before.
I didn't make it past the second paragraph.bob wrote: ↑Wed May 17, 2023 8:00 pm Raland's opposition to three justices' government's motion to dismiss.
Nothing, like you've seen before.
That'd the vibe I was getting before I gave up.Sam the Centipede wrote: ↑Thu May 18, 2023 5:31 am I made it a little further on a cursory skim.
I wondered if these idiots are arguing firstly that the principle of temporarily accepting the allegations in the complaint as true for the purposes of dealing with a Motion To Dismiss implies that the movant actually admitted that the allegations are true? Yes, crazy, but, hey, birthers.
Favorite stupid bits:northland10 wrote: ↑Wed May 17, 2023 9:48 pmI didn't make it past the second paragraph.bob wrote: ↑Wed May 17, 2023 8:00 pm Raland's opposition to three justices' government's motion to dismiss.
Nothing, like you've seen before.
In other words, you have to disregard court procedures built up over 230+ years that allow you to toss my garbage case and give me a trial. In other words, you're only fair if you do it my way. Also, the constitution forbids the government from retaliating against you for complaining. Nowhere in the constitution or in the body of law built up around it since 1789 does it say that the government has to take your stupid complaint seriously. They're free to ignore it.Brunson' s complaint of redress of his grievance against the Defendants when they violate their oath of office must be adjudicated and cannot be passed over by a motion to dismiss.
So let me see if I understand this. Old Testament prophet says stuff. Brunson claims that the Constitution is therefore divinely given by God and if judges don't follow the constitution, they will go to hell.Also taking note that "So help me God" are the last words found in the oath of office to which all the Defendants swore by, they have sworn to God. To those individuals who violate their oaths, Isaiah of the old testament has stated that "Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One oflsrael." See Isaiah 5:24. The "law of the Lord" as defined by Bible scholars is the Constitution. See page 5 of the complaint. "Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it." Isaiah 5: 14. This decree is set in place regardless of whether or not Defendants believe it.
Isaiah prophesied several things that pertain to us in modern times. He prophesied the birth of Jesus Christ, and then he prophesied something that had never before been revealed since the creation of the world; the Constitution-a law to guide how a government is to be.
When Isaiah prophesied the coming forth of the Constitution, he also warned of serious consequences that follow (as stated above) when the Constitution is violated.
Because it was prophesied that the Constitution would come forth, and is the law of the Lord, then it's fitting and has bearing that the scriptures of lsaiah are cited and used herein.
It seems to be the practice of many courts under the doctrine of equitable maxim to shut its door against arguments it chooses not to address. In so doing it violates the doctrine of the object principle of justice which is couched in the Constitution. Should that be the position of this court in this matter, its these types of rulings that lead to the revolution in 1776.
WHERFORE, in the name of justice, and in the name of" We the People" and as an act to preserve, defend and protect the Constitution Brunson moves this court to deny Defendants' Motion with an order to answer Bronson's complaint within 10 days or be in default.
I have no idea from which orifice he pulled 4727 from.Raland wrote:As of May 19th my federal court judge has received 4,727 letters from people all over this country telling him to allow my lawsuit against Sonia, Elena, and Ketanji to move forward! Thank you for your most awesome support on this! There is no power in this country greater than a court decision. President's have been stopped by court orders. State legislative decisions have been upstaged from court orders. Each and every day court decisions have stopped even the laws that congress has passed.
Two days ago, with the help of my brother Deron, I filed a motion opposing my Defendants request to stop my case. It's a powerful motion showing how the Defendants are attempting to rewrite the Constitution. You can download it on the bottom of the front page of www.enoughisenough.me
In the meanwhile my brother Loy's case #22-1028 is on the US Supreme Court waiting for the Solicitor General to respond. She has until May 24th, otherwise it will go to conference where the Justices will vote for a hearing.
Didn't they have a grifty thingy where you paid a "processing fee" to sign your name to a petition?bob wrote: ↑Sat May 20, 2023 6:04 pm https://facebook.com/story.php?story_fb ... ZGWr2ivenlI have no idea from which orifice he pulled 4727 from.Raland wrote:As of May 19th my federal court judge has received 4,727 letters from people all over this country telling him to allow my lawsuit against Sonia, Elena, and Ketanji to move forward! Thank you for your most awesome support on this! There is no power in this country greater than a court decision. President's have been stopped by court orders. State legislative decisions have been upstaged from court orders. Each and every day court decisions have stopped even the laws that congress has passed.
Two days ago, with the help of my brother Deron, I filed a motion opposing my Defendants request to stop my case. It's a powerful motion showing how the Defendants are attempting to rewrite the Constitution. You can download it on the bottom of the front page of www.enoughisenough.me
In the meanwhile my brother Loy's case #22-1028 is on the US Supreme Court waiting for the Solicitor General to respond. She has until May 24th, otherwise it will go to conference where the Justices will vote for a hearing.