The George Soros Article V Charade & the Open Article V Issue That Needs to be Ratified
In the first installment, I described the heated national debate about an Article V constitutional convention, or ‘ConCon’, being pushed by liberal and conservative groups.
Today, I am so thrilled that I can hardly contain myself. My article tomorrow, entitled ‘Donald Trump and Mark Meckler, You Can Change Everything,’ will explain how these two men can turn the tide of history well before the election, by completing an Article V action already on the table! But first I will finish my refutation of an Article V ConCon by providing three powerful objections.
In the conservative ConCon camp are Governor Greg Abbott, radio talker Mark Levin, and anchor baby Marco Rubio along with countless other political luminaries seeking PR mileage. In the liberal ConCon camp, George Soros’ fleet includes this huge list of progressive endorsers of a group called MoveToAmend.
Objection #1: An Article V convention of states to amend the Constitution is a Pandora’s Box. In the language of Article V there is no limit on the changes that a ConCon can make, as James Madison, Father of the Constitution, said in November 1788:
“…an election into it would be courted by the most violent partisans on both sides; it would probably consist of the most heterogeneous characters; would be the very focus of that flame which has already too much heated men of all parties; would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts but inadmissible in other parts of the Union might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric…it seems scarcely to be presumable that the deliberations of the body could be conducted in harmony or terminate in the general good. Having witnessed the difficulties and dangers experienced by the first Convention which assembled under every propitious circumstance, I should tremble for the result of a Second, meeting in the present temper of America, and under all the disadvantages I have mentioned.”
Madison was prescient; today, a progressive coalition pushing for a ConCon has a single stated goal, to nullify the ‘Citizens United’ supreme Court decision. Meanwhile, some conservative ConCon advocates propose a single-issue convention to obtain term limits or a balanced budget amendment, while others propose a laundry-list convention, as in Mark Levin’s book and Governor Abbott’s press release.
According to a long list of legal authors, law professors and at least two Justices of the U.S. supreme Court, a ConCon cannot be limited to only certain delegates or subjects; there is no such limit imposed in Article V.
Objection #2: Washington DC violates the Constitution a thousand times a day, and changing the contents of the Constitution will not alter that reality. Governor Abbott ironically makes this very point, refuting his own 70-page proposal right at the beginning: “It bears emphasis at the outset that the Constitution itself is not broken. What is broken is our Nation’s willingness to obey the Constitution and to hold our leaders accountable to it…We the People have allowed all three branches of government to get away with it.”
I want to expand on this obvious point by Governor Abbott. We The People bear all the blame for not enforcing the Constitution. As we stipulate in the preamble, We The People are the top sovereigns; in that law, we create, define and limit our servant, the federal government.
My article series next week, ‘The Second Amendment Movement is Dead Wrong,’ will explain how the NRA could have turned the tables on gun-grabbers over a century ago, but has refused; and how all Second Amendment advocates and movements are only adding to the violation of the Constitution instead of enforcing its stipulations as is our duty.
Two weeks from now, my article series will first expose the soft underbelly of the much-despised BLM, and then demonstrate how this year, We The People can begin to enforce the Constitution and recover over 640 million acres of state lands currently under illegal federal occupation.
My point here is that these are all matters of constitutional law enforcement that only the American People can accomplish. Governor Abbott says we have abdicated that power and duty; I agree. The full-spectrum mission of AmericaAgain! will end our abdication forever, and a ConCon will not.
Objection #3: There is already an active Article V item in the states. If the states want to show they are sincere about Article V and restoring the Constitution, forget a ConCon; let the states finish ratifying the open Article V action before them first!
*Article by David Zuniga