Brunson VS. Adams.

[Slade3200]

So instead of just denying it completely & removing the slightest hint of any legitimacy, SCOTUS accepted it specifically just to laugh at it?
Interesting take.

You need to monitor what your monkey is posting, it's making you sound stupid...er

Oh I have no clue what other peoples reasonings are. I’m just guessing that it will be laughed out of court and then another definitive stamp can be marked on these BS claims. How many dozen cases have flopped so far? Some people never learn

 

[Brick Layer]

after it gets laughed out of SCOTUS what will you say. SCOTUS is corrupt?

I will say as I always said it doesn't matter because of the LAW and ORDERS.

this suit is supplementary; the military is in control!

That little part of jurat where each named defendant agreed to defend and support the constitution...

DEREK JOHNSON DECODES FROM TRUMPS SPEECH

Ep. 2935b - Evidence Already In, The [DS] Got Caught, It’s Perfectly Documented For All To See

Get The Same Tactical Flashlight I Use For Self-Defense Here: Click Here --> http://www.fighterflare.com Get 20% OFF By Using Promo Code "Black20" The [DS] is panicking, they are not in the drivers seat, they are now reacting to everything the patriots are doing. Elon is now producing...

www.bitchute.com

 

[Brick Layer]

January 6th was a cover-up of the insurrection that took place on November 3rd.
The military knows, we caught them, we caught them all... [this is an act of war, and also treason].

See the video starting at, 1:00:00.

 

[Lastamender]

2020 Election Fraud and National Security Breach Case No. 22-380 now on the the U.S. Supreme Court docket - Dr. Rich Swier

The American Media Group's Medeea Greere in a November 17th, 2022 article titled Uh, Guys… A Supreme Court Case Regarding The 2020 Election Just Hit The

drrichswier.com

 

[Lastamender]

Here is how anyone can track this case.

(Reader: Lurch) SCOTUS Docket # 22-380

Patriots, we see and hear all kinds of information, the latest being about the SCOTUS Case 22-380. In case there is any doubt, the SCOTUS IS hearing this case.

operationdisclosureofficial.com

Patriots, we see and hear all kinds of information, the latest being about the SCOTUS Case 22-380. In case there is any doubt, the SCOTUS IS hearing this case. below is the link for the SCOTUS website and below that the search results for #22-380. It IS on the Docket.

 

[Brick Layer]

Here is how anyone can track this case.

(Reader: Lurch) SCOTUS Docket # 22-380

Patriots, we see and hear all kinds of information, the latest being about the SCOTUS Case 22-380. In case there is any doubt, the SCOTUS IS hearing this case.

operationdisclosureofficial.com

Patriots, we see and hear all kinds of information, the latest being about the SCOTUS Case 22-380. In case there is any doubt, the SCOTUS IS hearing this case.below is the link for the SCOTUS website and below that the search results for #22-380. It IS on the Docket.

US Supreme Court docket No. 22-380
Docket Files:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-380.html

Tuesday at 8:23 PM November 29th


.

SCOTUS Case #22-380 - Lawful Path Forums

 

[Brick Layer]

Only 147 members of the US Congress voted in support of the proposed ten-day audit of the election before certifying the ballot count of the Electoral College, while, according to the Washington Post, 377 members voted against the proposed ten-day investigation, and eight abstained.

Is this the Supreme Court case that will drain the swamp?

www.americanthinker.com

 

[Brick Layer]

 

[Brick Layer]

 

[Lastamender]

Good luck! You're gonna need it!

They did investigate the bogus claims of fraud, which were still bogus after investigating, and they did wait out for the court case decisions with alleged fraud claims, and did hand recounts and signature audits....then they followed the law, and certified their election results....

No, they violated their oath of office by siding with alleged fraudsters. The wanted investigation was to save the Constitutional Republic. The other members did not think it was worth saving. That violates their oath of office.

 

[Lastamender]

I’m glad they did… now when the laugh it out of court the crazy Right can’t claim that the corrupt court blocked the case from being heard.

Exactly what is laughable about the case? They clearly violated their oath of office. Just tell me what is laughable.

 

[Slade3200]

Exactly what is laughable about the case? They clearly violated their oath of office. Just tell me what is laughable.

Well they didn’t clearly violate anything which is why the case has been tossed and appealed. Now scotus can put their stamp of termination on it which most sane people know is going to happen and the nutballs like you can move your deep state conspiracy focus to blame SCOTUS

 

[Lastamender]

Well they didn’t clearly violate anything which is why the case has been tossed and appealed. Now scotus can put their stamp of termination on it which most sane people know is going to happen and the nutballs like you can move your deep state conspiracy focus to blame SCOTUS

Wrong.

 

[Slade3200]

Wrong.

Brilliant argument!

 

[Lastamender]

Brilliant argument!

All you deserve.

 

[Slade3200]

All you deserve.

It’s not about me deserving anything. It’s about you being able to present smart ideas, accurate facts and sound arguments…. Something you fail miserably at and apparently now you’re not even going to try. Ha

 

[Lastamender]

It’s not about me deserving anything. It’s about you being able to present smart ideas, accurate facts and sound arguments…. Something you fail miserably at and apparently now you’re not even going to try. Ha

The facts I have posted about 22-380 are accurate,

 

[Slade3200]

The facts I have posted about 22-380 are accurate,

Incorrect. You keep repeating that people are violating their oath of office. That’s not truthful

 

[Lastamender]

Incorrect. You keep repeating that people are violating their oath of office. That’s not truthful

The SC decides that. But it is clear they violated their oath. And don't you ever tell me what is truthful.

 

[Slade3200]

The SC decides that. But it is clear they violated their oath. And don't you ever tell me what is truthful.

You’re an admitted liar, so you could use my help with the truth. Especially when it comes to legal matters.

You just contradicted yourself btw