Why can't well meaning and usually intelligent people see the writing on the wall? The majority of Americans are on the Trump bandwagon. They are clamoring for Trump's agendas to make America stronger, to be codified in law as in Congressional legislation. Why can't they see that is is just as easy to repeal a law as it is to enact a law? Have they forgotten what happened when that blip Biden took control? What was it, three weeks when every item on Trump's agenda was reversed? Why do they think that won't happen this time? I guarantee, when the Socialist Democrats get back in power, and they eventually will get back in power, they will absolutely shred whatever Trump has managed to clean up. They will double down on every perverse agenda they ever inflicted on us ten times over.
For decades, the Democrats have not responded to what the majority of American people want for governance. In fact they have even ignored rulings by the Supreme Court and have tried continuously to get around the intent of the SCOTUS rulings. These rulings were to restore the basic and original intent of what the Founders wrote in the Constitution. Democrats don't want that, they don't want people to have the same freedom of self they had Seventy years ago. Democrats in my opinion, have more in common with third world dictators than they have in common with American citizens.
If you don't believe me just look at what they have championed since the beginning of the Obama Administration.
Lets start with the Obama Administration;
The Obama Administration has been the most lawless in the history of our country.
Listing 10 ways it was then;
1. The Chrysler bail out. Using Bush's illegal use of TARP funds Obama bullied secured creditors into 30 cents on the dollar and gave junior creditors more violating bankruptcy laws and also the Constitutional Takings and due process clauses.
2. Implementation of the ACA. Also, A little known part of Obamacare required congressional staff to get insurance from health exchanges rather than a taxpayer funded program. Obama directed the office of Personnel Management to, interpret the law to, maintain the generous benefits. The DHHS granted 2000 waivers for Democrat controlled states and denied them for Republican states like Indiana and Louisiana. HHS also continues paying insurance companies to compensate them for losses caused by Obamacare's ignorance of basic economics. ( This is the reason Schumer kept the Government closed to maintain a program that was patently illegal because Congress never appropriated the funds.)
3. Political profiling by the IRS;
After seeing a rise in the number of applications for tax exempt status, then IRS in2010 compiled a BOLO list to identify organizations engaged in political activities opposed to the Democrats like "Tea Party" "Patriots" "Israel" etc. for criticizing the government, educating about the Constitution, or challenging Obamacare.
4. Recess Appointments;
January 2012, President Obama appointed three members of the National Relations board as well as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection bureau during what he considered to be a Senate Recess. However, the Senate was holding "pro forma" sessions every three days, a tactic developed by Sen. Harry Reid to thwart Bush recess appointments.
5. DACA & DAPA
Congress has shamelessly failed to pass any sort of immigration reform, including for the most sympathetic victims of the current non-system, young people who were brought into the country illegally as children. Nonetheless, during his 2012 reelection campaign, President Obama directed the Department of Homeland Security to issue work and residence permits (Deferred Action to Childhood Arrivals) to the so-called Dreamers.
Then, after the 2014 midterms, the president decided that he had been wrong 22 times in saying he couldn’t give temporary legal status to illegal immigrants. The administration engineered this Deferred Action for Parents of Americans in the wake of Congress’s rejection of the same policies, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, immigration law, and the Constitution’s Take Care Clause. A district court enjoined DAPA in February 2015, which action the Fifth Circuit twice affirmed, as did the Supreme Court by a 4–4 vote.
6.Assault On Free Speech and Due Process On College Campuses;
In 2013 the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, in conjunction with the Justice Department, sent the University of Montana a letter that became a national “blueprint” for tackling sexual harassment. The letter urged a crackdown on “unwelcome” speech and requires complaints to be heard in quasi-judicial procedures that deny legal representation, encourage punishment before trial, and convict based on a mere “more likely than not” standard. (Note how the complaints are to be heard. that is the definition of a kangaroo court.)
7. The Clean Power Plan;
In June 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a new rule for regulating power-plant emissions. Despite significant criticism, it finalized the rule in August 2015, giving states until 2018 to develop plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, with mandatory compliance beginning in 2022.
The EPA cites Section 111 of the Clean Air Act as justification for this Clean Power Plan, but that section can’t give the agency such authority. Section 111 doesn’t permit the government to require states to regulate pollutants from existing sources when those pollutants are already being regulated under Section 112, like those deriving from coal-fired plants.
8. WOTUS Rule;
In May 2015, the EPA announced its new Clean Water Rule, which aims to protect streams and wetlands from pollution. The agency insists that the rule doesn’t affect bodies of water not previously regulated, but several groups have sued on the basis that the rule’s definitions of regulated waters greatly exceed the EPA’s authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate “waters of the United States” (WOTUS).
The Supreme Court has thrice addressed the meaning of that phrase, making clear that, for the EPA to have regulatory authority, a sufficient nexus must exist between the location regulated and “navigable waters.” The Clean Water Rule, however, purports to give EPA power far beyond waters that are “navigable” by any stretch of the word’s definition. Litigation is ongoing.
9. Net Neutrality;
In the works throughout the Obama presidency, the Open Internet Rule was adopted in February 2015 and went into effect that June, forbidding internet-service providers (ISPs) from prioritizing different kinds of internet traffic.
The real issue, beyond this “net neutrality,” is the Federal Communications Commission’s manufacture of authority to regulate the internet despite clear congressional instruction that the internet remain unregulated. In 2014, courts struck down the FCC’s 2010 self-aggrandizement under the 1934 Communications Act and 1996 Telecommunications Act, so the agency doubled down by writing a new rule that equated the internet with telephony.
That creative interpretation allowed the FCC to claim the sweeping discretion it had used to manage the AT&T phone monopoly throughout the 20th century. Moreover, while the FCC touts the regulation as ensuring that the internet remains free of censorship, the rule impinges on the First Amendment rights of internet-service providers.
10. EPA’s Cap-And-Trade;
In October 2015, the EPA issued a carbon-emissions cap-and-trade regulation, establishing for each state limits on carbon dioxide emission, with four interim steps on the way to the final goal. EPA says that this rule, too, is authorized by Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, but Congress considered and rejected such a cap-and-trade program in 2009. Far from being authorized by the Clean Air Act or lying in some zone of statutory ambiguity, this massive new regulatory scheme contradicts the express will of Congress.
The Biden years;
The Biden Administration has been accused of violating the Constitution in many ways, including failure to secure the Southern Border, extending eviction moratorium with out congressional approval, attempting to control the Supreme Court, not executing immigration laws and undermining separation of powers clause.
Key areas of concern;
Border Security;
Failure of securing border by halting barrier construction.
Releasing illegal migrants without court appearance dates and those testing positive with C-19.
Separation of Powers;
Extended eviction moratorium with out Congressional approval and Supreme Court warnings.
Handed over Federal Enforcement duties to locals.
Covid - 19 Mandates;
Imposed workplace vaccination and testing mandates that were deemed unconstitutional.
Judicial Independence;
Proposed reforms to the Supreme Court, including term limits, which would undermine it's independence.
Religious Rights;
Proposed rules that could diminish rights and protections for student organizations.
Women's Sports;
Supported policies that undermined women's rights in athletics by allowing biological m ales to compete in womens sports.
As you can see, this is just the tip of the Democrat Party lawlessness iceberg. They continue over and over committing like actions to enhance their power over Americans. It's time to stop them. The Legislative way will not stop them, it may not even delay them.
The only recourse we Americans have is the method the Founders placed in the Constitution to preserve it, and the ultimate power of American citizens as the Supreme American Governmental Authority.
That power is contained within Article-V. Article-V gives the people the power to overrule a rogue government. And to do it in a bloodless way.
We need the legislatures in 34 States to petition Congress for an Article-V Amendment Proposal Convention.
An Article-V is NOT a Constitutional Convention. It was included so there would never again be a need to open the Main Body of the Constitution for change. You can consider the Constitution minus the Amendments as written in stone, and will always be unchanging. If you are worried about it, there are other safeguards in the Article-V Amendment proposal convention format.
1. The same safeguards which are in place for a States called convention, are the exact same ones in place for a Congressional originated convention.
2. It takes 34 States to initiate a States called Article-V. Congress must open it then step back and let the States and people take charge.
3. It takes 38 States to ratify an Amendment proposal into Constitutional Law.
Ok we all know that.
However, there is more to the protections than that.
By way of the rule of precedence, set by the ogoing Congressional Article-V conventions of the past, several Other things will come into play.
When a proposed Amendment is entertained by the Article-V delegation it must be worded exactly the same, and the wording agreed on by all the delegates.
When an approved Amendment is sent to Congress they are by law required to send it out to all 50 states for ratification.
Congress is not allowed to change anything within the Amendment proposal (Example; if the amendment cuts pay and benefits for Congress they can't change it).
The current time limit for Ratification is usually 7 years but the 27th Amendment ratified in1992 was one of the original 12 proposed, Bill of Rights Amendments. Congress can set a limit on the time for ratification but the Constitution does not set a limit, that's how the 27th was ratified over 200, years after it was proposed.
All these protections would make it impossible for any group to hijack the convention, like the pro Congress influencers are constantly spreading fear about. I don't believe Congress could stop a convention once it was started despite the fact a States Convention would slash their governmental power forever. I also believe the alternate being tossed around being called a "Convention of States" is not Constitutional because there is no reference to a "Convention of States" within the Constitution. It would not matter if 38 States signed on to a proposal, it would by law still have to go out to all 50 states to be legally ratified.
Have I now made it clear why we are in desperate need of an Article-V?
Or. am I wasting my time?
Comments welcome!
The Tradesman
Replies