Sit down; I guarantee this Supreme Court story is real
Blessings on you and your family from all the Huckabee staff! Thank you for subscribing and I hope you enjoy today’s newsletter.
DAILY BIBLE VERSE
25 And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.
1. Sit down; I guarantee this Supreme Court story is real
By Mike Huckabee
The Supreme Court has agreed to a hearing for a case that could conceivably --- PLEASE consider this the longest of long shots --- overturn the election of 2020, throw out all the legislators who voted to certify the results and leave them ineligible to run for office ever again, even for town dogcatcher.
The case has been added to the docket for, appropriately, January 6, 2023.
There’s essentially no media attention being given to this case; most news outlets find it much too hot to touch. But the heat doesn’t faze us; we keep a pair of oven mitts close by for times like this.
As Joshua Philipp reported in a podcast for EPOCH TV, the case Brunson v. Alma Adams, et. al., alleges that members of Congress who voted against the proposed 10-day audit of the 2020 elections and certifying those results --- with no investigation after being “properly warned” of a credible threat from enemies of the Constitution --- were violating their oath of office to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic.” It says that “this action unilaterally violated the rights of every citizen of the U.S.A. and perhaps the rights of every person living, and all courts of law.”
If SCOTUS ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, the remedy would conceivably involve removing the sitting President and Vice President and all those representatives and empower the Court to authorize the swearing-in of the rightful President and Vice President. Not kidding; that’s the remedy the plaintiffs are asking for.
The Brunson brothers are an interesting group –- literally a band of brothers, as they play in a trumpet band. Here they are, with their summary of the suit, which was reportedly written by just themselves, without legal counsel (!).
Note: Philipp’s report was made before SCOTUS agreed to hear the case, and he said then he would be “very surprised” if they did. So I guess he’s very surprised right now. Actually, I am, too, considering the way the Court refused to look into those very allegations in the weeks after the election, when they were brought by President Trump. (Of course, now we know much more about the lengths to which Trump’s enemies went to interfere with the outcome. Maybe enough Justices are feeling some guilt right now about calling the issue “moot.”)
Philipp also pointed out that this segment of his show, “Crossroads,” would not be allowed on YouTube. (Good news, though: he can now post the link on Twitter!) We’ll include the EPOCH TV link here…
The argument in this case is that by not looking into serious allegations of election fraud, those who voted to confirm the results of the 2020 election broke their oath of office and are ineligible to run for any elected office again. To give you an idea of the scope of the potential fallout, Kamala Harris is in that group, and so is Mike Pence.
This started as two separate lawsuits brought by four brothers in Utah, but only one of them is advancing to the Supreme Court. To get it there, the brothers bypassed the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, where it was stalled, by saying in a cover letter that this suit was a matter of national security. The Court was apparently so interested in this case that they received a personal call from the Court clerk asking how soon they could get their documents together. The brothers got it all to them in one week.
The suit names President Biden, VP Harris, former VP Pence, and 385 members of Congress, and, no, that is not a typo. Those are all the members who voted against a proposition for them to investigate claims that “enemies of the Constitution rigged the 2020 election.” So, this case is NOT about whether or not election fraud occurred. It’s about whether or not these people violated their oath by failing to investigate credible allegations of election rigging by enemies of the Constitution –- allegations that had been made by over a hundred of their own colleagues.
In their words: “Is this about a rigged election? No, it’s about the members of Congress who voted AGAINST the investigation, thereby thwarting the investigation. Was this a clear violation of their oath? YES.” The suit says this violation is an act of treason and fraud. “A successfully rigged election has the same effect as an act of war: to place into power whom the victor wants, which in this case is Biden, who, if not stopped immediately, will continue to destroy the fundamental freedoms of Brunson and all U.S. Citizens and courts of law.”
“When the allegations of a rigged election came forward, the Respondents had a duty under law to investigate it or be removed from office.”
According to Philipp, a finding for the plaintiffs would “also restore Trump to office because he would have been the legitimate candidate.” We’re not yet sure how that part of the argument works but are researching. Even if a majority of the Justices found merit in this case, would they be willing to do something this huge? They would be keeping in mind the potential consequences and, of course, possible effects on the balance of power. If this happened, it would be the wildest things ever to happen within our government --- a purge, really, which, I have to admit, sounds pretty great with the state our country is currently in. But you know the saying, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Here are some thoughts on the case from Timothy Canova, a professor of constitutional law at the Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law.
Tim Canova: Supreme Court Considers Case Seeking to Overturn 2020 Presidential Election
2. Elon Musk suspends the accounts of reporters he says doxxed him
By Mike Huckabee
Laugh of the Day: There's a whole lotta screamin' goin' on, because Elon Musk has suspended the Twitter accounts of several journalists at CNN, MSNBC, the WASHINGTON POST and THE NEW YORK TIMES.
As reported late Thursday night by Trace Gallagher, media critic Steve Krakauer had seen that several accounts were suspended and had tweeted in response, “This is outrageous.” Krakauer retweeted Jason Kint's comment on the suspensions, “I don’t know what happened here, but if @elon musk doesn’t fix this within the hour with an explanation by morning, I’ll be on Capitol Hill tomorrow demanding that he be hauled in front of Congress.”
CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan, whose is now suspended from Twitter, went on the air to speak of “the potential chilling impact this might have for freelance journalists, independent journalists...” That is just so funny. I wonder how many of these suspended 'journalists' ever showed concern for the “chilling effect” that banning conservative journalists caused.
NEW YORK TIMES reporter Trip Gabriel tweeted, “Musk is a blatant hypocrite when it comes to free speech.”
But Elon Musk tweeted this explanation: “Criticizing me all day long is totally fine, but doxxing my real-time location and endangering my family is not.” He said that reporters were violating the rules by tracking his location and tweeting or re-tweeting it, offering what he characterized as "assassination coordinates."
3. Congress throws "Hail Mary" passes
By Mike Huckabee
It should be a given that no Congress can try to rush through big, transformative legislation during a lame duck session just before it’s replaced by a new Congress. But that doesn’t stop politicians from trying. The good news is that most of the current efforts to throw “Hail Mary” passes into the voters' faces are failing.
First up, the “bipartisan” amnesty bill crafted by Republican Sen. Thom Tillis and now-Independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema is dead. It was supposedly just to provide amnesty to DACA enrollees and increase border security, but critics said it would have allowed up to seven million relatives of DACA applicants to also receive amnesty for entering the US illegally. There wasn’t just a lack of Republican support, there was hostility verging on revolution. So thankfully, that won’t be forced on us as this current Congress limps out the Exit door.
Next, with the endless crises the Democrats have unleashed on America, you’d think the House would have better things to do than push for a last-minute bill to “decolonize” Puerto Rico and let it vote on whether it wants to be independent, a US territory or a state. Since it would become a Democrat-voting state that we’d still be supporting while it pays no taxes, there is no way this would pass the Senate, so like much Democrat legislation, it’s just a virtue-signaling waste of time.
And while there’s still a danger that Congress will pass a giant omnibus spending bill that would tie the hands of the incoming GOP House on budget matters until next September (rather than just pass a bill to keep the government funded through January), loud and angry opposition by the Republican base to this baffling capitulation by Mitch McConnell seems to be getting through to Washington. House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy said he is a “hell, no” vote on it, and many other Republicans are now equally vocal in their opposition. They can’t stop it in the House, but let’s hope the growing fury throws some fear into the Senate squishes who are always eager to hand the Democrats a win while handicapping their own party. Keep up the pressure.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Morning Edition to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.