Citizen News

Share this post

Brunson v. Alma S. Adams et al, Action against 388 federal officers who refused 10 day delay in Electoral vote count, Act of treason and fraud by Respondents

citizenwells.substack.com

Brunson v. Alma S. Adams et al, Action against 388 federal officers who refused 10 day delay in Electoral vote count, Act of treason and fraud by Respondents

Citizen Wells
Dec 8, 2022
8
4
Share this post

Brunson v. Alma S. Adams et al, Action against 388 federal officers who refused 10 day delay in Electoral vote count, Act of treason and fraud by Respondents

citizenwells.substack.com

Brunson v. Alma S. Adams et al, Action against 388 federal officers who refused 10 day delay in Electoral vote count, Act of treason and fraud by Respondents

RALAND J BRUNSON, Petitioner, v. ALMA S. ADAMS, et, al., Respondents.

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

“STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Citizen News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

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 (“Respondents”). All the Respondents have taken the required Oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and as such they are liable for consequences when they violate the Oath of Office.

Respondents were properly warned and were requested to make an investigation into a highly covert swift and powerful enemy, as stated below, seeking to destroy the Constitution and the United States, purposely thwarted all efforts to investigate this, whereupon this enemy was not checked or investigated, therefore the Respondents adhered to this enemy. Because of Respondents intentional refusal to investigate this enemy, Petitioner Raland J Brunson (“Brunson”) brought this action against Respondents because he was seriously personally damaged and violated by this action of Respondents, and consequently 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.

On January 6, 2021, the 117th Congress held a proceeding and debate in Washington DC (“Proceeding”). Proceeding was for the purpose of counting votes under the 2020 Presidential election for the President and Vice President of the United States under Amendment XII. During this Proceeding over 100 members of U.S. Congress claimed factual evidence that the said election was rigged. The refusal of the Respondents to investigate this congressional claim (the enemy) is an act of treason and fraud by Respondents. A successfully rigged election has the same end result 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.

Due to the fact that this case represents a national security breach on a unprecedented level like never before seen seriously damaging and violating Brunson and coincidently effects every citizen of the U.S.A. and courts of law. Therefore, Brunson moves this court to grant this petition, or in the alternative without continuing further, order the trial court to grant Brunson’s complaint in its fullest. 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.

Despite the grave importance of this case, the trial court granted Respondents motion to dismiss (“Motion”) by stating “IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that plaintiff Raland Brunson’s action is dismissed without prejudice”. (“Order”) This Order followed the trial court’s order to adopt its report and recommendation that Brunson did not get until close to the beginning of Oct. 2022 thus prejudicing Brunson from timely filing any objections, and the Order did not properly address Brunson’s opposition to the Motion. Brunson’s opposition clearly shows that Brunson has standing.”

Read more:

The Supreme Court Building - Supreme Court of the United States

Citizen News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

4
Share this post

Brunson v. Alma S. Adams et al, Action against 388 federal officers who refused 10 day delay in Electoral vote count, Act of treason and fraud by Respondents

citizenwells.substack.com
4 Comments
Jenni Madden
Dec 17, 2022

I am asking that whomever values our valid and important Constitution of the United States, please write to the Supreme Court (1 First St. NE, Washington, DC 20543) to urge them to favour Mr. Brunson's case. Then, write to Mr. Raland Brunson (4287 South Harrison Blvd., Apt. #132, Ogden Utah 84403) to thank him for his courage and determination in bringing this case to SCOTUS. Thank you and God bless you!

Expand full comment
Reply
G A Lewis
Jan 7·edited Jan 7

Aren't Respondents in Brunson v. Alma S. Adams in violation of Petitioner's Constitutional right to Redress of Grievance? It seems this right has been improperly nullified by the courts' persistent neglect.

Expand full comment
Reply
2 more comments…
TopNewCommunity

No posts

Ready for more?

© 2023 Citizen Wells
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start WritingGet the app
Substack is the home for great writing