| | November 27, 2022 SUPREME COURT CASE NO. 22-380 In a very surprising turn of events the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is about to hear a case that has profound implications. | | | It is possible (not probable, but possible) that this could result in the 2020 presidential election being nullified.
Nullification would not put President Trump back in office. It would, in layman's terms, be a declaration that the results of that election were invalid, and a new election must be held.
Thanks to a subscriber who brought this to my attention, I downloaded a pdf of SUPREME COURT CASE NO. 22-380 - available at this link:- https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-380/243739/20221027152243533_20221027-152110-95757954-00007015.pdf
In it we see what those implications are (bolding added for emphasis). "This case uncovers a serious national security breach that is unique and is of first impression, and due to the serious nature of this case it involves the possible removal of a sitting President and Vice President of the United States along with members of the United States Congress, while deeming them unfit from ever holding office under Federal, State, County or local Governments found within the United States of America, and at the same time the trial court also has the authority, to be validated by this Court, to authorize the swearing in of the legal and rightful heirs for President and Vice President of the United States." | | Image added because I like it. - MK | | The document lists "The following 388 Respondents ... as defendants ... "
The list includes Liz Cheney, Dan Crenshaw, James Comer, Charlie Crist, Jaime Herrera Beutler, Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff, and hundreds of others, both Democrats and Republicans.
From the pdf again:- "This action is against 388 federal officers in their official capacities which include President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr, Vice President Kamala Harris, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and former Vice President Michael Richard Pence ...
The docket goes on to say the respondents are guilty of treason and fraud because despite being told by 100 of their colleagues that the 2020 election was fraudulent, they certified the election without any investigation.
Speaking for myself, having seen many courts refuse to accept any cases even marginally related to the 2020 election, it seemed amazing to me that the Supreme Court would suddenly take on this case immediately after the midterm elections, and right at Thanksgiving.
What I have now learned is quite mind-expanding for a guy who grew up in a foreign country (New Zealand) under a totally different political system, although just as rotten to the core as US politics and jurisprudence has been for decades. | | So why now?
Why do this during this final period of the current Congress, known as the "lame duck" session because the new and Republican-dominant one won't have its first session until next January.
Why?
Because, to put it in my own words after listening to a short video involving Juan O Savin, , the outgoing individuals are far from being lame ducks.
They now have the opportunity to push through laws that at any other time would stand every chance of being completely defeated, or would most certainly have reduced their chances of being re-elected in the midterms if they had tried to pass them earlier.
The main point here is that they have said they intend to change the law, which would give them an opportunity (if they were still in power) to stack the Supreme Court in their favor by imposing limits on how long a Supreme Court Justice might serve.
It would take many years of litigation to undo such a law, and could potentially see one or more current justices removed, leaving the way open for them to be replaced by those favored by the Democrats (read that as Deep State, which includes RINOs when it comes to a final vote) if they ever get back in power. | | | | Now, according to Savin, who has spoken with an expert in Constitutional law, the Supreme court has taken on this case to fight back, and fight for their own future.
It is a counter-move which every one of those 388 named defendants must surely now be aware of.
I'd say it should have scared the bejesus out of them, because central to the case is everything to do with what they did when they voted to ratify that stolen election.
It may be an irony, but this same Supreme Court refused some time ago to hear a case that was brought by President Trump and others, on the grounds that they did not have "standing." That case too was about the 2020 election being rigged.
But if you step back a bit, perhaps this really is a real-life movie, playing out scene by scene, and this decision by SCOTUS to hear this case just may be the one that fully exposes ALL the bad boys, and girls, who have been working so hard to destroy America, its Constitution, and its future.
And the last word from that case submission PDF:- "Brunson’s complaint is the mechanism that can immediately remove the Respondents from office without leaving this country vulnerable without a President and Vice President." | | | | | Editorial Policy/DisclaimerFor myself, be it what may be termed lies, facts, opinion, mis- or disinformation, beliefs or claims of truth, and regardless of the source, I classify all of them under one neutral word - Information.
I repeat ... Information is neutral.
Every little puzzle piece is its own piece of information, but not any single one of them reveals the whole picture. Nor can any single article.
I am both a reporter, and an editor. As a reporter I report what others say and do. I include source links whenever relevant so you can follow through if you so desire. I also have freedom as an editor to insert my own opinions (and identify them as such), or write a complete editorial on any chosen subject.
I make no claims of absolute truth or accuracy, nor do I always agree with what I report. But I do my best to provide information that you are entitled to accept, reject, or disagree with as you choose.
I read all incoming emails, welcome any article, video or link suggestions, but do not use or reply to all of them. However, some may be used as a "letter to the editor" but identified only by the use of initials.
Comments are always welcome, including those that might point out something that needs clarification, or correction.
Best wishes. Be safe. Be Prepared. Sincerely, Michael Knight.
| |
|
|
