#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

Abandon reality, all ye who enter here. *Democracy*Under*Threat*
Post Reply
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#1

Post by Luke »

MAGATs have been pumping another hopium case filed by 3 pro se trumpet players from Utah who think they can remove 380 Members of Congress, the President and VP. #BiscuitForSpeaker has a better shot (and she has NOT conceded!). After being smacked down in state court with a removal, 10th Circuit also obviously bounced it and now it was in the 1/6 SCOTUS conference. The denial will be tomorrow.

It's a typical case of nobody involved having a single clue of what they're doing, or what the procedure is, but they PRAY a lot. They supposedly got 50K letters from marks sent into SCOTUS.


Image



Petition is at https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... 007015.pdf

Brunson.jpg
Brunson.jpg (49.84 KiB) Viewed 4627 times

Even the clowns Tracy Beanz and Robert Barnes took the time to walk through why this is totally ridiculous and a grift at UncoverDC:
The Truth About the Brunson Case
By Adam Carter / Tracy Beanz -December 30, 2022

This column isn’t going to earn anyone money—to the contrary—many of you will likely hate us for writing it. But the truth is the truth. The purpose is not to “create division” or call out other conservative “influencers” simply because we have differing opinions. We have all spent years watching blatant government corruption, constitutional rights being trampled, and elections stolen—all with no one being held accountable.

Understandably, there are many who are frightened, confused, and feeling desperate after witnessing all of this. They are hoping for a “hail mary” to come flying in that will restore the country to the constitutional republic—with equal justice under the law—that she was meant to be. And in their desperation, they are prone to cling to whatever appears promising that’ll make it happen.

Sadly, there are people out there who will exploit, profit from, or simply “grift” off that desperation by filling the need with false hope—or “hopium.” It appears, unfortunately, that Brunson v. Alma S. Adams; et al. (No. 22-380)—also known as “The Brunson Case”—pending before the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS), is just such an example.

Where the Case Really Stands
First, we need to dispel some misunderstandings about the status of the case. It is not “scheduled for a hearing” before SCOTUS. So far, it is simply a petition for a writ of certiorari that’s been scheduled for conference. All that requires is filling out an online application and paying a filing fee.
Lots more: https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/12/30/th ... nson-case/


Image


Even with election deniers and MAGAts writing the article, the masses on Twitter continue to grift and say it's going all the way. Absolute delusion.

Justin @enmety Jan 7
Replying to @ColdWarPatriot
Keep your eyes peeled for #SCOTUS decision on #BRUNSONVSADAMS Monday the 9th. Hope everyone saved some 🍿 🍿 🍿
Oh yeah, Justin. We did. We did.





10th Circuit denial: https://casetext.com/case/brunson-v-adams-4

SCOTUS Docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.asp ... 2-380.html





This interview is like SNL. Raland Brunson is literally giggling through it, showing wonder at how three broke trumpet players might have grabbed the brass ring. BUT they have their PLAN B... if it's denied, they're going for a Motion For Reconsideration! :lol: Apparently, they have another Federal case that didn't go anywhere so their PLAN C is revive that case and send it to SCOTUS. Rev Dr Laity Esq would have tears in his eyes.






Here's another bro with "the most important case in America" (not as funny):






Bob and I have been having a hilarious time simply trying to explain the rules. But these folks, just like ReVote, just get angrier that anyone would dare to say their fantasy won't come true.









Q! :lol:





Twitter search for #BrunsonVSAdams: https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Brunson ... yped_query


If you want some laughs, or want to join in the pounding of these fools, check my profile or some_jerk's. :dance:
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

#BrunsonVAdams - MAGAts Version of ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#2

Post by Luke »

Karl Koenigs would be so damn proud, someone is blowing a Shofar outside of SCOTUS. If Karl and Brand were Real Patriots, they'd be there. :lol:





40 minutes of video :lol: The stupid comments are a treat. Doesn't look like Brunson folks, it's random free J6 terrorists. At 26 minutes or so, Ashli Babbitt's Mom is there (fresh off her arrest or before).
LIVE: Supreme Court scenes as court conducts cert review of Brunson case
31,421 views Streamed live on Jan 6, 2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Many of you have been asking about the Brunson case, and today, January 6, is the day they go to a conference to consider this (and 430 other) cases to see if they will move to full hearings or reject the review. For additional coverage see News2Share. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbBm...

Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5500
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

#BrunsonVAdams - MAGAts Version of ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#3

Post by bob »

This case is so birther-esque! Like the OG days. :bag:

There are even screenshots of anonymized randos claiming SCOTUS voted at conference (5-4, natch) to grant the cert. petition. :smoking:

As always, this case isn't really about the case: it is about the grifters peddling it, and those who uncritically want it to be real.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5500
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

#BrunsonVAdams - MAGAts Version of ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#4

Post by bob »

This is what actually gives me the most pause about this case.

Gateway Pundit: Tim Canova: Supreme Court Considers Case Seeking to Overturn 2020 Presidential Election:
The important national security interests implicated in this case allowed the Brunsons to bypass an appeal that was frozen at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit and get the case to the Supreme Court which has now scheduled a hearing for January 6, 2023.
That's just fractically wrong: the case didn't bypass the 10th, and there are no "national security interests implicated" by yet another pro se frivolous case clogging the bottom of the courts' dockets.

If this was just Jim Hoft saying this, I'd just :roll: and move on. But:
Guest post by Tim Canova

* * *

The writer is a Professor of Law at the Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law in Fort Lauderdale where he teaches Constitutional Law.
While Broad Law isn't that impressive, Canova has a good resume, and has been teaching law for over 25 years.

Canova at some point drank the Kool Flavor Aid because he was a Democrat for decades; he "famously" tried to primary Wasserman Schultz in 2016.

Whether Canova will go full Clements and lose his tenure remains to be seen.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9625
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#5

Post by Foggy »

 ! Message from: Foggy
Totally great stuff, but I edited the title to look like a real lawsuit. :biggrin:
🎶 We went for a ride,
We got outside,
The sand was hot,
She wanted to dance ... 🎶
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#6

Post by Luke »

Thanks, Foggy! Almost didn't post it since it'll be denined tomorrow, but it's so nuts to see the lying and grifting. Tim Canova has gone insane after challenging and losing to DWS twice.

As Bob pointed out, examples of straight lying:

BA Ney.JPG
BA Ney.JPG (68.86 KiB) Viewed 4484 times

Victoria.JPG
Victoria.JPG (69.71 KiB) Viewed 4484 times

RSBN 🇺🇸 @RSBNetwork
Supreme Court to consider election case that seeks to remove Biden, Harris from office
rsbnetwork.com 10:00 AM · Jan 7, 2023
1.9M Views 8,232 Retweets 729 Quote Tweets 41.5K Likes
The comments are insane.





Mike Lindell's Emerald Robinson discusses the slam dunk it's going to be with noted legal expert Tina Peters on FrankSpeech's show "The Absolute Truth": :lol: (FrankSpeech videos don't seem to embed, so sad) https://frankspeech.com/video/scotus-ag ... n-vs-adams

And, of course, Roger Stone. Brunson starts around 9:30 and, of course, names the SCOTUS clerk. Danny Bickell must be smiling:





Reality from the Salt Lake Tribune:
These Utah brothers want the Supreme Court to remove Joe Biden from the White House, reinstate Donald Trump
The U.S. Supreme Court could decide on Friday whether or not to hear a longshot lawsuit that alleges members of Congress broke their oath of office by certifying the 2020 presidential election.
By Bryan Schott | Jan. 6, 2023, 1:00 p.m.| Updated: 4:04 p.m.

A longshot lawsuit by a trio of Utah brothers has captured the imagination of many on the fringes of the political right. The suit, which leans on baseless claims of fraud in the 2020 elections, seeks to kick President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and nearly 400 members of Congress out of office and reinstate Donald Trump to the White House — though a legal expert says there’s very little chance of that happening. On Friday, two years after a horde of Donald Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol as part of an attempted coup, the Supreme Court is scheduled to decide whether to hear Brunson v. Adams. The lawsuit claims members of Congress violated their oaths of office by allegedly failing to investigate and covering up evidence of foreign election interference that rigged the election against Donald Trump. The plaintiff on the Supreme Court petition is Raland Brunson of Ogden. His brother, Loy, unsuccessfully ran for the GOP U.S. Senate nomination in 2018 and 2022 and has an identical lawsuit now in federal court. Brunson’s suit claims rampant fraud invalidated his vote for Donald Trump in 2020. The complaint asks that the 387 members of Congress who voted to certify Biden’s election be immediately thrown out of office and barred from ever running again. Biden and Harris would also be removed from the White House and banned from running, as would former Vice President Mike Pence.

Among those facing expulsion if the suit succeeds include Utah Reps. John Curtis and Blake Moore, and Sens. Mike Lee and Mitt Romney, who all voted to certify Biden’s election. Reps. Chris Stewart and Burgess Owens joined with the majority of their House Republican colleagues by voting to throw out electoral votes for Biden in Pennsylvania, citing vague allegations of election integrity. Then, the suit says that not having a president or vice president in office is a national security risk, so Trump should become immediately eligible to be inaugurated president. The argument ignores the presidential line of succession, which would elevate the speaker of the House of Representatives to the presidency. “It’s very possible that Donald Trump could be the President of the United States in the next few days,” Loy Brunson claimed confidently during a Thursday interview with Roger Stone.

Lloyd Brunson’s case on January 6th changes everything
— Trevor Lee (@VoteTrevorLee) December 30, 2022

These right-wing theories have been publicized on far-right media, including the notorious fake news website Gateway Pundit and promoted by former Arkansas Governor and GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. The Brunsons have an active Telegram channel, Twitter account and presence on Trump’s Truth Social platform to publicize their case. The suit even caught the attention of state Rep.-elect Trevor Lee, R-Layton, who, in tweeting his “wildest precision for 2023,” said, “Lloyd (sic) Brunson’s case on January 6 changes everything.” On social media, the Brunsons have asked followers to write a pair of letters, one to the Supreme Court in support of the case, the other to send them a dollar to fund their efforts. They claim to have received more than 50,000 pieces of mail so far.

Brunson’s case has taken a winding path since it was filed in Utah’s Second District Court in June of 2021. The case was moved to a federal district court, where it was dismissed for lack of standing. Brunson’s appeal of that dismissal to the 10th Circuit Court was denied, prompting the current appeal to the Supreme Court. Although Raland is listed as the complainant on the Supreme Court petition and is representing himself, his brother Deron Brunson says he is the legal expert of the family. “I’m the guy who put it all together,” he said during a telephone conversation. Deron forcefully claims that members of Congress who voted to certify Biden’s election win violated their oath of office and repeatedly said the lack of an investigation into claims of election interference was an “act of war.” “Allegations that the election is rigged should not be given aid and comfort, it should be investigated and if false it should be squashed and the perpetrators held accountable for such false claims, if found to be true then those people involved should be charged with treason,” Brunson said in a follow-up email.

There is no evidence that widespread fraud occurred in the 2020 election or on a scale that would change the outcome. Brunson is also asking for $2.9 billion in damages, and that the court make it “tax-free.” When asked why he thought the court could waive taxes on that windfall, Brunson replied, “We think the court has the power to do that.” According to Raland Brunson’s website, Deron relies on an online course titled “How to win in court” for his legal expertise. The course costs $249. The case is scheduled for the Supreme Court’s conference meeting on January 6. If at least four of the nine justices vote to hear the case, they’ll hear oral arguments later this year. Andrew Torrez, a lawyer and co-host of the “Opening Arguments” legal podcast, says don’t bet that the justices will take the case because the government waived its right to file a response to Brunson’s petition. “That’s the government saying this is so atrocious there is no chance the court is going to take this. Don’t make us waste time writing paper to tell you something you already know,” Torrez said.

Torrez, who recently devoted an entire episode to discussing Brunson’s lawsuit, adds the waiver has a caveat asking the court to inform them if they would like them to file a response, which would only happen if there was a possibility the court was seriously considering the case. “As someone who has been practicing law for 25 years, I have never, ever seen the Supreme Court take a case where the government waived their right to respond to the petition. If you’re a gambling man, this is a pretty strong indicator the court is going to deny the suit,” Torrez says. Brunson’s appeal is scheduled for discussion among the justices on Friday, with a decision expected sometime Monday. There is a chance they could run out of time during Friday’s conference, which would delay any determination until the next conference day, scheduled for January 13.
https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/20 ... t-supreme/

Here's the program by Andrew Torrez:
DECEMBER 26, 2022 BY LAWPOD
OA668: A New Case Right Wing Sources Are Blatantly Lying About
Calling all Uncles Frank for a frank but respectful breakdown of how your right wing media sources are simply not telling you the truth. A laughably terrible “Supreme Court Petition” is going to “Rewrite the History of American Politics.” Except… it will do no such thing.
So if you’ve got an Uncle Frank in your life who you are seeing over this holiday break, point them to this episode and maybe we can start finding a tiny bit of common ground!
https://openargs.com/oa668-a-new-case-r ... ing-about/


Seeing the dead-end MAGAts with their hopes SO HIGH and unwilling to to listen to reason is going to be delicious tomorrow morning.
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9625
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#7

Post by Foggy »

Well, I don't want to detract from the hashtag, for those who want to follow the antics mañana, and that is:
 ! Message from: Foggy
#BrunsonVAdams
But we can't search by hashtag here, so I just wanted to make the title not be so terribly jarring for the poor, miserable IAALs, who already have to sit in the back of the bus and stuff. :mrgreen:

Anyway, keep that hashtag in mind tomorrow, peeps, it will lead to much merriment.
:banana:
🎶 We went for a ride,
We got outside,
The sand was hot,
She wanted to dance ... 🎶
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14683
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#8

Post by RTH10260 »

Foggy wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 6:27 pm Well, I don't want to detract from the hashtag, for those who want to follow the antics mañana, and that is:

[ mod Foggy]#BrunsonVAdams[/ mod]

But we can't search by hashtag here, so I just wanted to make the title not be so terribly jarring for the poor, miserable IAALs, who already have to sit in the back of the bus and stuff. :mrgreen:

Anyway, keep that hashtag in mind tomorrow, peeps, it will lead to much merriment.
:banana:
Boss - this message is just to inform you that the hash browns tag will stick to a word and is searchable ;)
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9625
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#9

Post by Foggy »

Yeah, everybody remember that tomorrow. :?
🎶 We went for a ride,
We got outside,
The sand was hot,
She wanted to dance ... 🎶
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#10

Post by Luke »

As Orly Taitz made Taft Skool of Law 'n Stuff proud, the "How To Win In Court" University is proud of the Brunson Bros (at least, for paying the $249). Why can't we have Fogbow University????

Brunson Sov Elector.JPG
Brunson Sov Elector.JPG (66.32 KiB) Viewed 4428 times

How To Win In Court.JPG
How To Win In Court.JPG (174.72 KiB) Viewed 4428 times

Winning is Easy!
Learn How to Control Judges in Just 6 Hours.
Complete Procedure and Evidence Tactics.
Everything You Need to Win in Court.
Case-Winning Competence.
Strategies that Work!

https://www.howtowinincourt.com/FrameSe ... QStartHere



Another crazy stupid video:

Mad As Hell University 2K followers Streamed on: Jan 5, 9:01 pm EST
Jan 5th SCOTUS Update with Raland Brunson
This week, on the cusp of J6, Defend Florida is excited to bring on Raland Brunson. Raland is the actual plantiff on the case that is docketed at SCOTUS. If you recall, two identical cases were filed, one under Loy, the other under Raland.
In this interview, we will cover the case, Q&A's and hear Raland's unique insight into the what is next to come. Please mark your calendars for Thursday, January 5th at 9:00 PM EST so you can join the Brunson Charge coalition.
Raj Dorisamy, "Defend Our Union" is a host. About 9 minutes in but Raland has tech issues for like 10 mins. Raland gives off a Roland Rotunda clown vibe. He's really into it at about 25 minutes in, he's telling the story again and has no idea what he's talking about. He keeps thinking they're getting away with something when it's just standard appellate practice. What they are trying is so dumb it confused some of the clerks until they figured it out, then everything was denined and thrown out.




BIG MAN @ROCNROLLREBELL
Brunsons to bypass an appeal that was frozen at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit and get the case to the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court considers Brunson v Adams
highlandcountypress.com
Supreme Court considers Brunson v. Adams
The Brunson lawsuit does not claim the election was stolen, merely that a large majority of Congress, by failing to investigate such serious allegations of election rigging and breaches of national...
3:38 PM · Jan 7, 2023


When a lawyer tries to talk sense to a QAnon... and this is a nice MAGAt.
StratumQ @StratumQ
It has been suggested that at some point in the process, or in an ongoing capacity...
... #SCOTUS requested the #Brunson v. #Adams case at 'the direction of the #Military'.
If this is true in any way, would this be a rarity?
5:36 PM · Jan 8, 2023

post.news/maxamegalon2000 @Maxamegalon2000 51m
Replying to @goosedeals and @StratumQ
Yes, the rejection will be released tomorrow morning.

StratumQ @StratumQ 41m
Replying to @Maxamegalon2000 and @goosedeals
If this turns out to be true, well done.
At this level of case, #NationalSecurity, we more likely learn more on Wednesday.
What is your research background on SCOTUS' historical precedents, and or Military Law and its SCOTUS implications?
Genuinely serious question.

post.news/maxamegalon2000 @Maxamegalon2000 38m
Replying to @StratumQ and @goosedeals
I will not claim to be more knowledgeable on those specific areas than the average attorney. But such knowledge is not required to know that the petition will be denied.

StratumQ @StratumQ 29m
Replying to @Maxamegalon2000 and @goosedeals
We'll agree to disagree.
Good luck with your prediction and assertion.
Have a blessed day!
MAGAt are seeing tonight like Christmas Eve, Santa SCOTUS is coming down the chimney to deliver 300+ Members of Congress, Pence, Biden and Harris being removed and/or never being allowed to seek office again. Raland thinks maybe the MILITARY will enforce the removals. These folks are so desperate they're fine with courts or the military overturning the government and removing elected officials by force simply because they wouldn't go along with the GOP fantasy during the certification on Jan 6 2021 to "throw the results back to the states for 10 days to investigate". Since the Brunsons agree with overturning the election results, they want their Utah reps including Romney removed from office too also. :smoking:
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14683
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#11

Post by RTH10260 »

I wonder how our Mike Dunford feels about spending four+ years on university study and post graduate doctorate time when he could have received his knowledge and degrees for a mere for $249 and overnight shipping :think: :twisted:
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#12

Post by Luke »

Haven't caught up with Mike in a while, seems like everything is going great with his new endeavors and I'm so happy that's the case.

Sent him a couple of tweets about this fabulous case. I checked Twitter Advanced Search and appears he hasn't tweeted about it. It could definitely be in his Litigation Tourism Disasters roundup.

Filled him in and said check out the topic here :lol:








Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14683
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#13

Post by RTH10260 »

I understand that Mike has moved over to Mastadon and is signed up at several sites.

Main address seems to be @questauthority@mastodon.social
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5500
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#14

Post by bob »

RTH10260 wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 10:15 pm I understand that Mike has moved over to Mastadon and is signed up at several sites.
Yes, but Mike D. hasn't deleted his Twitter account, and he occasionally still comments on the bird site.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#15

Post by noblepa »

This thread is the first I have heard of this case.

It obviously is some MAGAts who believe that Trump is the rightful king President, but what are the specific charges that they make?
User avatar
MN-Skeptic
Posts: 3077
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:03 pm
Location: Twin Cities

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#16

Post by MN-Skeptic »

The inevitable conclusion -

User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#17

Post by noblepa »

Shocking!! The evil Deep State has obviously gotten to even SCOTUS.

TO THE STREETS!!!!
W. Kevin Vicklund
Posts: 2161
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pm

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#18

Post by W. Kevin Vicklund »

The #MAGAtTears :crying: are starting to flow...
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5500
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#19

Post by bob »

noblepa wrote: Mon Jan 09, 2023 8:51 am This thread is the first I have heard of this case.

It obviously is some MAGAts who believe that Trump is the rightful king President, but what are the specific charges that they make?
Very briefly: SCOTUS was going to toss from office every elected federal official who ignored Cruz's demand for a 10-day "pause" to re-recount the 2020 electoral votes.

Shockingly, it didn't.

Ob.:
Image ImageImage
Mr brolin
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:59 pm
Occupation: Chief Blame Officer
Verified: ✅ as vaguely humanoid

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#20

Post by Mr brolin »

Followed by a Petition to Reconsider the Reconsideration etc, rinse and repeat until the grift dries up.... :bored:
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 5675
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#21

Post by Luke »

OMG is this the Jason Hoyt who fawned over Terry Trussell? He's back? :lol:


Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow 💙s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
User avatar
Frater I*I
Posts: 3230
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:52 am
Location: City of Dis, Seventh Circle of Hell
Occupation: Certificated A&P Mechanic
Verified: ✅Verified Devilish Hyena
Contact:

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#22

Post by Frater I*I »

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: Mon Jan 09, 2023 11:33 am The #MAGAtTears :crying: are starting to flow...
And they’re so sweet and delicious…
"He sewed his eyes shut because he is afraid to see, He tries to tell me what I put inside of me
He's got the answers to ease my curiosity, He dreamed a god up and called it Christianity"

Trent Reznor
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2453
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#23

Post by noblepa »

Mr brolin wrote: Mon Jan 09, 2023 12:08 pm Followed by a Petition to Reconsider the Reconsideration etc, rinse and repeat until the grift dries up.... :bored:
They seem to think that SCOTUS is going to say, on the second try, "By golly, you're right. We made a mistake the last time."?

If they were to actually file more than one motion to reconsider, what recourse does the Court have, to punish/prevent such a waste of the Court's time? Can they instruct the clerk to not accept any more motions from that party?

Its called the Supreme Court for a reason. There is no further appeal after you lose at SCOTUS, whether on the merits of your case or if they decline to hear your case.

For that matter, would a (first) motion to reconsider even be brought up in the conference that SCOTUS uses to pick cases to hear? I know that not all cases that request cert are even distributed for conference. Law clerks for the justices pre-screen cases and only pass on those that they think stand at least a snowball's chance in hell of being granted. I would think that the clerks would see this motion and realize that it was a 1000:1 shot at best in the first place and put the motion in the trash.

Given the enormous number of cases trying for certiorari every year, unless a motion to reconsider is accompanied by some new and novel legal arguments, not brought up the first time, I suspect that the court seldom even entertains an MTR, let alone grants one.
chancery
Posts: 1432
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#24

Post by chancery »

IIRC, the rules permit only one motion petition for reconsideration, which gives the clerk's office authority to reject additional motions without requesting guidance from the justices.

[google, google]
The Clerk will not file consecutive petitions and petitions that are out of time under this Rule.
Rule 44.4.

Also, too, the grounds for a motion for reconsideration of a petition for certiorari are quite limited.
Its grounds shall be limited to intervening circumstances of a substantial or controlling effect or to other substantial grounds not previously presented. The time for filing a petition for the rehearing of an order denying a petition for a writ of certiorari or extraordinary writ will not be extended. The petition shall be presented together with certification of counsel (or of a party unrepresented by counsel) that it is restricted to the grounds specified in this paragraph and that it is presented in good faith and not for delay; one copy of the certificate shall bear the signature of counsel (or of a party unrepresented by counsel). The certificate shall be bound with each copy of the petition. The Clerk will not file a petition without a certificate. The petition is not subject to oral argument.
Rule 44.2 (cleaned up)
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5500
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

#Brunson v. Adams - MAGAts Version of Birthers Hopium / ReVote2017 SCOTUS Case

#25

Post by bob »

noblepa wrote: Mon Jan 09, 2023 1:08 pm If they were to actually file more than one motion to reconsider, what recourse does the Court have, to punish/prevent such a waste of the Court's time? Can they instruct the clerk to not accept any more motions from that party?
No need; SCOTUS' shipping clerks aggressively patrol the filings: they'll bounce a proposed re-reconsideration petition and court will never see it.

The brothers will have to get Taitzian and try something really unpossible, like a petition to have shipping clerk stop shrouding me.

SCOTUS has a vex lit list; the brothers in theory could be added to it.
For that matter, would a (first) motion to reconsider even be brought up in the conference that SCOTUS uses to pick cases to hear? I know that not all cases that request cert are even distributed for conference.
All cert. petitions are voted on at a conference. But many are deadlisted and voted on without a discussion.

Other petitions, applications, and motions usually are decided at conferences, but not necessarily so: a clerk could internally solicit votes until five justices agree on the result. But they they still require justices' votes.
Given the enormous number of cases trying for certiorari every year, unless a motion to reconsider is accompanied by some new and novel legal arguments, not brought up the first time, I suspect that the court seldom even entertains an MTR, let alone grants one.
They all get votes, but, yes, few get an actual conversation.

And grants are extremely rare, and usually based on external changes (read: new justice on the court).
Image ImageImage
Post Reply

Return to “The Big Lie & Aftermath of The Former Guy”