Posted on 02/21/2021 1:09:03 PM PST by RandFan
Mark Meckler, the new interim CEO of Parler, currently supports a Convention of States that could give George Soros and other interests the power to rewrite the Constitution. Meckler, who was appointed as interim CEO of Parler following the removal of founder John Matze, currently runs the Convention of States Project, a supposed “grassroots” organization pushing for a convention under Article V of the Constitution.
The project describes itself as a “national effort to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution, restricted to proposing amendments that will impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit its power and jurisdiction, and impose term limits on its officials and members of Congress,” which initially sounds appealing.
However, a report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities argued that such a restriction on an Article V convention would be impossible, with states unable to control what a convention could and could not discuss, and nobody else having clear constitutional control over the convention.
Former Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote in 1988 that “there is no way to effectively limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the Convention if we don’t like its agenda.”
Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia echoed this sentiment in 2014. “I certainly would not want a constitutional convention,” said Scalia. “Whoa! Who knows what would come out of it?”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalfile.com ...
Again known history: the one thing that the Civil War proved was the Supremacy of the Federal Government.
If a convention were convened, and the delegates decided on a Parlimentary State as I have previously conjectured, why would they need their new proposal to be ratified by any states?
Could they not simply decide that approval of the U.S. House of Representatives would be sufficient to enact this new device they created?
After all, the Federal Government is Supreme. This, I believe, is something the founders would have found objectionable. If they could have foreseen the events of 1861-1865, they might not have written the constitution at all.
I would agree that it should only be used as a last resort to prevent violent upheaval. This is why I also say the first order of business is to recognize the dissolution of the union ... That way, any state that does not accept the outcome can go their own way in peace.
As a Texan, I simply say that we tried that. It did not work out well for us.
Good luck!
Well, the declaration of independence thing was tried, too. Texas had one in 1861. Didn’t work out well.
Which brings me back to my original statement, “Anything can happen at a convention.”
The federal government is supreme? I do not believe that at all. I believe the people are the ultimate deciders.
As far as what prevents the convention from simply deciding that ratification of the House is all that is needed? Again the answer is the people. The people are supreme and simply would not allow it. They would lose consent of the governed and the whole thing falls apart.
There is always risk...The only consideration, for each individual, must be: Are the risks to be taken worth the benefits to be gained?
Were 3/4 of the colonies in the British Empire on the side of the 13?
Remember, that was a time when the sun never set on the British Empire. We know King George did not agree.
No matter how you slice it, you cannot deny Southern Independence while maintaining the legality of the American Revolution. You can merely say, “might makes right”, and “the victor gets to write the history books”. ;)
Ah yes, but now we are back to talking about voting them out of office, aren’t we?
If we can hold our representatives accountable, then why a need for a convention?
I'm not talking about that at all, it's too late for that. You can vote in communism but you can't vote out of it.
I'm my opinion it's time to forget about DC entirely. Washington is totally corrupt and beyond repair.
In my opinion we should focus ALL of our effort at the state level. Use our time, effort, money and votes to take over conservative states and nullify federal law on a mass scale. Codify the federal government out of our lives. All the power and money resides in the states and always has which is the way our republic was supposed to work in the first place. This is already starting in Texas and other states as well. I don't give a crap who controls the house and senate if their unconstitutional laws stop at the border of Texas. As an example we are going to nullify all federal gun laws and make enforcing them a crime. It's in the works and it's going to happen.
I’m okay with any convention of states amendments as long as they add a process for a state to leave the union that is not unreasonable.
I wasn't aware there was a provision for colonies amending the British constitution. That could have saved us a great deal of trouble in 1776 and onward.
I'm sorry to say "might makes right" is a staple of human history. Nations will always employ it. The questions are how much might? and for what purposes? One has to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath when cleaning up the house.
There is a higher likelihood that Margot Robbie will show up at my door tomorrow, profess her undying love for me and want me to marry her. I can positively assure you that will NOT happen. Quit worrying or hoping about things that will NEVER happen.
As you know, there was no British Constitution. The King was sovereign, and he did not agree. That is why we had to fight for our freedom. The colonists won in 1781, the Southerners lost in 1865.
We can twist the pretzel as many ways as we wish, but this was the only difference.
Peace.
What a hyperbolic headlines. Full of BS. I hate that crap.
I currently do not support the conveyor states because there aren’t enough freedom loving Americans around that would improve things.
I totally agree with your assessment that we can only take back what is rightfully ours and ignore what goes on in Washington. I only hope that it never reaches the point where Washington decides to once again put us under Marshall Law as they did from 1865 - 1877.
Still, I believe an amicable separation is the best way forward, and that is the primary reason I cannot support any convention dealing with the Constitution (including COS). My belief is that such a convention would make it even more difficult to obtain our freedom.
Since when is Soros a US citizen???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.