Skip to comments.Martin Armstrong Warns Of 2016 Constitutional Convention
Posted on 04/03/2014 2:49:54 PM PDT by Lorianne
very interesting political development has taken place, but you can bet the Democrats will fight tooth-and-nail to prevent it. This week the state legislature of Michigan became the 34th state to demand a Constitutional Convention in the United States. Pursuant to Article 5 of the US Constitution, if 2/3rds of the states call for such a convention, (meaning 34 states) it MUST take place. We will see if this is actually honored. At the very least, there is no time requirement so this could be dragged out for years.
Nevertheless, in such a convention, the ENTIRE Constitution is subject to review and can be altered and changed. This could be everything from installing social justice to the dissolution of the federal government. Everything is on the table as if we were back in 1776 Philadelphia.
(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...
here we go again...
I’m not worried. Any amendments proposed must still be approved by 3/4 of the states.
Why don’t people do some research before they write crap like this?
Man, that is one slow-loading .jpg!
It’s Zero Hedge.
This is just the beginning of the fear mongering. But it’s good in a way. It means that it scares the living daylights out of them. And it should.
These conspiracy websites are funny.
They can’t amend the entire Constitution this way, they can only amend the specific parts forwarded by the states voting for this.
Armstrong thinks the entire constitution will be up for grabs. I’ll assume he is merely ignorant, not stupid.
The Zero Hedge people are wrong about a constitutional convention for the following reason. The product of a constitutional convention is not a new amendment to the Constitution. If the folks at Zero Hedge would actually read the Constitution's Article V then they would know that product of such a convention is only a proposed amendment to the Constitution. It is then up to the states to ratify the proposed amendment, ratification necessary to officially add it to the Constitution.
Or the states can choose to ignore the proposed amendment which would mean that constitutional convention that produced it was a waste of time.
In fact, although the delegates to the original Constitutional Convention signed the final draft of the Constitution, their signatures did not ratify the proposed Constitution. The delegates actually had to go out and sell the proposed Constitution to their respective states who subsequently ratified it.
The GOP holds super majorities in 23 states. The democrats hold majorities in 13. That’s a sizable advantage for us.
“to the dissolution of the federal government”
That I could get behind.
If it were, though, I'd have some modest suggestions. Dissolving the federal government would be on the table. I think nitric acid should suffice.
I’d take the attorney general away from the president and find a different way of choosing one who would enforce the law equally.