Yesterday my friend passed along a message that he had received from one of his friends, who probably got it from one of their friends. It referred to a Supreme Court case about the unresolved election integrity issues surrounding the 2020 election.
I’ll share the screenshot so you can see how it came in:
My immediate takeaway was hmm…. Brunson v Adams is at the Supreme Court for another election integrity case? Hadn’t heard about that one. Better look into it.
I clicked through to the ‘Women Impacting the Nation’ website, and let’s just say that’s where a few red flags started going up. Something just didn’t feel right.
To me, it felt like a setup, like a psyop, like a way to get people excited and busy sending letters to the SCOTUS, only to have their hopes dashed against the rock of reality before the whole emotional cycle started over again. But maybe I’m wrong.
I’ve talked a lot about psychological warfare this year, so maybe I’m just jaded, right? Maybe I’m just looking for a boogeyman who isn’t actually there, right? Maybe my gut instinct is just a knee-jerk emotional reaction that has been conditioned and primed by my thousands of hours of sifting through all the crap in search for actual fact—anything is possible—but something just didn’t sit right.
So I dug deeper.
And I will share what I found (and how I found it) in a separate video (made special just for the Patriot Club), but here and now I want to maximize my time by summarizing my findings and musing upon the implications.
Degrees of Deception
I don’t like bullies, and I really don’t like liars. I have a great disdain for anyone who tries to deceive other people. It pisses me off, to be blunt. “Come try that shit on me,” rips through my mind. My protective instinct kicks in and I’m ready to fight.
I know the person who passed this information along, and by all accounts this individual is a fine upstanding citizen, a true patriot, a lover of God and country, a person I have respect for, who I would stand up for, and who I have no doubt would stand up for me too. This individual is kind, caring, and more than capable of carrying an intelligent conversation.
This person is certainly no fool, nor are they easily fooled.
And yet I believe, in this instance, that this individual—and many, many other red-blooded Americans with equally stalwart credentials—has been deeply deceived.
I do not make that assertion lightly.
It comes with a heavy heart. It stings to know that any of us can be deceived at any moment, which is just part of human nature, but now we are actively being targeted. That’s why we’ve got to look out for each other, sharing what we learn and what we think we know, so as to keep each other sharp and out of the jaws of deception.
Let’s do some digging.
First up, let’s examine the headline from the article:
Brunson v Adams: SCOTUS Election Integrity Case
Now, if you were to simply jump in and read the article, you’d be thrilled by what you read. But let’s just take it one step at a time. Ask the question:
Is there a Supreme Court case on election integrity filed under Brunson v Adams?
Here’s where it gets tricky. The answer is no. There is no SCOTUS case. There is only a petition to have the case heard, which the court may or may not hear, that is virtually guaranteed to be dismissed long before the allegations ever see the light of day… BUT, that said, it IS possible to find the “case” on the Supreme Court website, here:
Obviously there’s something to look at here. Immediately my mind zeroed in on this:
At first glance, it looks like a legitimate petition. I’m not a lawyer, so I was curious what this “writ of certiorari” was all about. So let’s just see what the legal minds over at Cornell law school have to say about it, shall we:
WRIT OF CERTIORARI
A type of writ, meant for rare use, by which an appellate court decides to review a case at its discretion. The word certiorari comes from Law Latin and means "to be more fully informed." A writ of certiorari orders a lower court to deliver its record in a case so that the higher court may review it. The U.S. Supreme Court uses certiorari to select most of the cases it hears. The writ of certiorari is a common law writ, which may be abrogated or controlled entirely by statute or court rules.
My takeaway is that it’s a rare writ of common law that may be “abrogated or controlled”—as in totally ignored or subjugated to—court statutes and rules. In other words, it really has no legal teeth. It may be somewhat akin to pissing in the wind.
PAUSE. I realize it is possible that some people may want to challenge this Cornell definition, and that’s fine. I encourage everyone to do their own research. But consider this: If some dude named Brunson wants to challenge the Supreme Court and have the sitting president arrested, he’s going to need some legal teeth.
And just in case you think I’m exaggerating, that is exactly what Brunson v Adams petition (not case) aims to do:
Those are big words. Those are powerful words. Those words give some people hope that justice may yet prevail, that wrongs will be righted, and that the “legal and rightful heirs for President and Vice President” might actually be instated.
Regardless of whether or not you believe the election was stolen; Regardless of whether or not you want Biden tossed out and Trump reinstated; Regardless of whether or not you believe there is ample proof to validate such action; Ask yourself:
Do you really believe that is going to happen? What about all the other court cases that have been tossed out? What about all the objections to the 2020 elections presented by Trump’s legal team and others? Surely these were amongst the most well-informed, best positioned, brilliant legal minds, right? And they failed. They were rejected. All the legalese ultimately amounted to nothing in the court of law.
Now we are supposed to believe that Brunson, Raland J Brunson the trumpet playing Mormon from Utah, is going to challenge the 2020 election, demand that election integrity be restored at once, that Trump be reinstated, and that country be rightly restored to its Constitutional founding? I commend the guy for trying, but honestly?
Look at the guy:
Now I’m not quick to judge a book by it’s cover, but….
Why would anyone in the halls of power listen to this peasant?
We’re being played.
Last night I was all fired up about this and was ranting to my wife about all the things I was learning as I dug deeper and deeper. The fact that Brunson’s address was a rent-a-box at a UPS Store, next to a Tobacco Barn no less… The fact that his petition contains typos and poor grammar… The fact that the legal precedents he was citing didn’t actually exist in the legal cannon… The fact that cases that were being quoted didn’t actually align with or support the Brunson v Adams petition… and on and on.
All of this had my neural synapses firing off like firecrackers. My mind was lit up like the 4th of July. These were lies, Lies, LIES I tell you!!! This guy is a LIAR!!!
But my wife was unimpressed. Says she:
“So, what? Why are you getting all fired up about this? Why do you care so much?”
I blurted out, “Because they are lying to my friends!”
Think about how many people are getting this information. Think about how it might feel if you really believed that justice was about to be served, that our country was about to be restored. Think about how powerful those emotions might be.
That’s hope. Nervous excitement. Certainty and uncertainty all mixed into one.
Now think about the feeling that will come when this too falls through. Can you feel the disappointment? Can you imagine the weight of discouragement? At some point such emotions might even morph into disbelief, disillusionment, despondence, and even desperation. If sustained long enough, this emotional path might lead one to detachment, derangement, or even doing something stupid.
These are the hallmarks of a psyop.
Let me sum it up.
This case will not be heard in the Supreme Court. I’d put money on it.
This petition is at best an effort to get attention and raise money off of well-meaning, big-hearted Americans who want desperately to save our country.
At worst, it is an intentional psyop designed to lead people to disillusionment and acts of desperation, while simultaneously setting people up for ridicule and shame.
Either way it undermines the trust in information. It undermines trust in each other. It undermines the sense of community. It undermines credibility. It undermines our ability to stay focus and organized around practical actions that will have an actual impact. In short, it’s just another distraction that undermines effective opposition.
I will break this down much more in the Patriot Club special report.
For now, suffice it to say, please do not send Brunson any money. Keep your eyes wide open my friends. They are working overtime to keep us distracted and divided. We can win this battle, but it’s not going to happen with petitions like this!
Please share this with someone who needs to here it: