Inaugurated 'fraudulently': Supremes to look again at 2020 election claims
Case charges a 'rigged' contest is equivalent to a war
By Bob Unruh
Published February 15, 2023 at 10:36am

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to take another look at 2020 election-fraud claims, and it will only take four votes for the case to come under a full briefing and arguments schedule.

A report from Just the News reveals the justices are to review a lawsuit charging that Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and others, including 291 members of the House and 94 senators "violated their oaths of office by refusing to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election before certifying Biden as the winner."

That meant, the case charges, that Biden and Harris were inaugurated "fraudulently."

The plaintiff in the case is Raland J. Brunson, and he's seeking the removal from office of those who committed that offense.

The court last month declined to hear the case, but he filed a petition for reconsideration and now the court has scheduled a private conference for that review.

Four of the nine justices must vote to review for a hearing to be scheduled.

Critics of President Trump's claims about election fraud say his arguments repeatedly have lost in courts – often to decisions by Democrat-appointed judges.

But what is known about the 2020 election is that Mark Zuckerberg handed out, through foundations, hundreds of millions of dollars that local election officials often used to influence the result by recruiting voters from Democrat precincts.

The Media Research Center later found out, through a poll, that 36% of self-described Biden voters said they were not aware of evidence linking Joe Biden personally to those deals.

Thirteen percent of those voters, 4.6% of all Biden voters, said had they known the facts, they would not have voted for Biden.

That change undoubtedly would have cost Biden victories in multiple swing states, and would have installed President Trump in his second term.

Brunson is representing himself in the case and filed the case in 2021 in Utah. He appealed to the Supreme Court after lower courts disagreed with him.

He eventually went directly to the Supreme Court by invoking the high court's Rule 11, Just the News reported, which allows a case to bypass a lower appeals decision if it "is of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this court."

He argues, simply, that if there is no penalty for election officials who violate their oaths of office, the oaths essentially are worthless, or "not binding."

Just the News explained, "a 'rigged election' is equivalent to war since both 'put into power' a 'victor,' he argues, and therefore allegations of 'a rigged election' must be investigated."

He said, "The Oath of Office requires that aid and comfort cannot be given to those levying war through a rigged election."

Further, he said a rigged presidential result is a "threat to the Constitution."

Members of the GOP in Congress had requested an "emergency audit" of the election in disputed states, and a total of 147 Republican lawmakers objected to the certification of Biden's election results.

https://www.wnd.com/2023/02/inaugurated-..._es=%5B-MD5-%5D