Reader Post | By Vee
SO I did a little research …wanted to verify this info so I can rely it to others.
Fact check: False claim the Supreme Court will hear case to reinstate Donald Trump.. The claim: Supreme Court will consider case to reinstate Donald Trump
Supreme Court declined to hear Brunson v. Adams
There is no truth to the claim that the Supreme Court will consider the case Brunson v. Adams, according to Aziz Huq, a professor of law at the University of Chicago.
Brunson v. Adams was brought forth by three brothers who accused nearly 400 members of Congress, Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and former Vice President Mike Pence of failing to investigate baseless allegations that the 2020 election was rigged.
Supreme Court Rejects Case To Reinstate Trump Over ‘Rigged’ Election
Supreme Court Denies Rehearing Of Brunson v. Adams
Justices turned down the request for the rehearing of Brunson v. Adams on Tuesday, February 21st, making it even less likely for the Utah brothers to succeed in removing President Joe Biden from office. They are not giving up, however, and Raland Brunson took to Facebook the same day, saying: “[Second] Petition denied. Moving on to plan C. I will say more about that within the next few days. We have been working long and hard on these strategies and there are more to come.”
Supreme Court Reconsiders Case to Reinstate Trump
The Supreme Court declined to consider the lawsuit on January 9, but the plaintiff, Raland Brunson, filed an appeal on January 23. Now, the court has to reconsider whether or not to hear the case, according to an update on the SCOTUS’ website that read that the lawsuit was “distributed for conference” on Friday.
“The petition was denied. We will now make our next move,” Brunson wrote on Facebook after the court declined the case on January 9, Zach Schonfeld of The Hill reported last month. “A petition for reconsideration. Hang in their everyone,” Brunson wrote on Facebook following the decision.”
In the appeal filed on January 23, Brunson argued that the court should grant a rehearing because the case “represents a very powerful domestic covert operation that is so benign that it cannot been seen on how it has breached our national security, and how it is affecting the national security of both Canada and Mexico, and how it has circulated fears that we might soon see the destruction of property along with a large volume of bloodshed in our own streets.”
How much more must I look for ?
I don’t know Bruce.. say it isn’t so.