Constitutional Convention is a serious thing. Not something that needs to be a one-sided thing.

Is this also a c**p in the making?

How can that be pushed through when dems are in the majority?


ABC News
Former senator discusses the hushed efforts to change the US Constitution
ABC NEWS
Wed, August 31, 2022 at 2:12 PM

There is a new strategy that far-right activists are using to attempt to weaken the foundations of our democracy: something called the “convention provision” in the Constitution, according to a former senator.

Former Sen. Russ Feingold spoke with "ABC News Prime" about his new book “The Constitution in Jeopardy,” co-written with attorney Peter Prindiville, about what they see as a coordinated effort to amend the Constitution and making sweeping changes to our democracy using a specific provision in Article 5

MORE: Can e******n deniers win big in the midterms?

PRIME: Senator Feingold, thank you so much for taking the time to be with us tonight.

FEINGOLD: Thanks so much for having me on.

PRIME: Now, a central theme in your book here is focused on Article 5, which allows Congress to make amendments to the Constitution. But you make the case here that a growing group of far-right activists across the country want to essentially exploit another facet of Article Five, which is the convention provision. So tell us what this provision is and why you think it poses a threat.

FEINGOLD: Well, my co-author Peter Prindiville and I have been studying this very closely for a couple of years. Article Five of the Constitution says that if two thirds of both houses of the Congress propose a constitutional amendment and three fourths of the states ratify it, that can create a constitutional amendment. That's the only way it's ever been done.

But there's another provision there that allows two-thirds of the states to apply for a constitutional convention and if they do, Congress has to call it. And our concern is that the far-right groups realize that there would be no limitation on what could be discussed and considered at a convention like that. So they can really undo our Constitution and there's a growing movement to do it on the far-right, and it's time to blow the whistle on it and have people realize it.

PHOTO: Protesters take over the Inaugural stage during a protest calling for legislators to overturn the e******n results in President Donald Trump's favor at the Capitol, J*** 6, 2021. (The Washington Post via Getty Images)
PHOTO: Protesters take over the Inaugural stage during a protest calling for legislators to overturn the e******n results in President Donald Trump's favor at the Capitol, J*** 6, 2021. (The Washington Post via Getty Images)
PRIME: So on that note, you said in your book that this constitutional convention could, in fact, set in motion attempts to fundamentally alter our system of government. You went on to say, quote, every contentious political and social issue could be on the table. But, I mean, I have to ask, how realistic do you think that scenario is?

FEINGOLD: Unfortunately, it's very realistic. Peter and I have studied very closely the fact that they are actually doing model conventions now. They are preparing, they're identifying the people that would be the delegates, and they have an agenda that is pretty clear: they want to really gut the ability of the federal government potentially to protect the environment, to protect civil rights laws, to protect v****g rights. They could ban a******n in the Constitution. Basically, they could do almost anything.

And by some counts, they're close to the 34 states. We think they're using phony numbers to come up with that, but a new Congress might decide we're just going to count it this way. So we think it's an imminent threat and it would be foolish for people who care about our Constitution to not realize that this is something that could really happen and could be worse than J*** 6, worse than what's happened with the Supreme Court. It could be the worst thing yet.

PRIME: And while you call this a threat, the argument from these far-right groups, though, is that their proposals would limit the power and the jurisdiction of the federal government and that they would be putting forward procedural amendments, things that wouldn't really garner any headlines. But again, you say perhaps they have a more severe agenda and consequences?

MORE: Authorities monitoring online threats following FBI's Mar-a-Lago raid

FEINGOLD: No, there's no doubt they have a more severe agenda. Rick Santorum, the former senator and p**********l candidate, has said it's like having a live weapon and you just need to pull the pin on it. So their agenda is not something mild, they may put it in mild terms, but what they're trying to do is make it so. The federal government can't protect the environment, that the federal government can't stand up to protect reproductive rights of women, that the V****g Rights Act is gutted even further. And so it's in their writings, it's in their statements, it's very clear. In fact, they even want to make it, some of them, that if 30 states say they don't like an act of Congress, they can just override an act of Congress.

PRIME: Well, it has been, though, several decades since the last amendment to the Constitution. In fact, only 27 amendments out of the 11,000 proposals to Congress have even been ratified. And while this convention process would make that easier to do, have you found any potential benefits to pursuing amendments, especially in such a divided nation right now, where many states disagree with these with the federal government's decisions?

FEINGOLD: Yeah, we call this the Constitution in jeopardy for two reasons. One is this far-right movement to rewrite the Constitution and take us back to the 18th century. But the other is we do need amendments, but we need to amend it in a different way. We need to change Article Five so that the people, we the people by a majority v**e or by majority v**es in the States make the changes.

MORE: After Buffalo shooting, experts question whether America can face its far-right extremism problem

PRIME: And so while you do support some change, are there any specific amendments that you think could actually garner the support needed and that would perhaps benefit our democracy?

FEINGOLD: Yeah, I mean, you know, Congress once almost passed an elimination of the E*******l College in the 1960s. I think that's a pretty popular thing. I think there'd be other things that would be popular, but that's not what's going to come out of this convention if these folks on the right have their way. What's going to come out of it is a gutting of the ability of this country to protect itself. And it's going to be a very hard result for the diverse people who live here in the 21st century. That can't be allowed.

PRIME: Okay, former Senator Russ Feingold, our thanks to you for taking the time to be with us tonight.

FEINGOLD: Thanks so much.

Former senator discusses the hushed efforts to change the US Constitution originally appeared on abcnews.go.com

https://share.newsbreak.com/1ou7ztl0

Fed announced Digital currency built on Totalitarian Block Chain technology.

The current administration is a puppet for the Wotld Economic Forum, WHO, the U.N. as are other world leaders.
Roll out is May 2023 after ten years in development.
Did you hear that? That means to be on a Digital world scale, first the dollar has to equal the other nations currency. They have to crash our Stock Market first.

I've been warning, get every cent out of anything to do with the stock market.

E******n I**********e and Denial?
Between 2017 and 2020, did Trump’s team systematically seek to change the v****g laws in key states to radically t***sform traditional b****ting, in a mail-in or early v****g revolution, in which only 30 percent of the e*****rate would v**e on E******n Day?

If Trump improperly questioned the b****t result of the 2020 e******n, then he sinned in the long tradition of p**********l b****t objectors, including former U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), J****** 6 c*******e chairman himself Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), and Hillary Clinton, who claimed Trump was an illegitimately elected president and advised Biden not to concede if he lost the 2020 popular v**e. A defeated Stacey Abrams toured the country claiming she was the “real” governor of Georgia, yet nobody smears her as an “e******n t***her.”

Was there any “dark money” effort analogous to the efforts of corporate and tech money along with DNC activists and Biden operators in what Time magazine’s Molly Ball described as a “conspiracy” to ensure the defeat of Trump’s opponent?

Did Trump’s team coordinate with right-wing billionaires to infuse hundreds of billions of dollars to modulate street protests, to absorb the work of state and local registrars in key precincts, and to censor unfavorable stories on social media?

Trump impotently railed and bayed to the wind about the “f**e news” reporters at his rallies. By contrast, the Left, both private elites and public officials, kept quiet and injected half a billion dollars to alter the way people v**ed and effectively to censor the way people produced and consumed the news.

Restoring Our Norms?
How about Trump’s efforts to revolutionize the very system of government? Did he promote a court-packing scheme to ensure he might not just get a 5-4 majority, but perhaps an 11-4 conservative advantage in a new 15-justice Supreme Court?

Did he keep mum while right-wing demonstrators swarmed the homes of Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan? Did his attorney general ignore the obvious felonies involved in such threatening tactics? Did Trump work with his Republican Congress in 2017 to end the filibuster to ensure his legislation would not be stonewalled? Did he dream up ways of getting rid of the E*******l College so the “blue wall” might never return?

It’s alleged that Trump was insincere when he approved the request for thousands of federal troops to be available to local law enforcement on J****** 6, or that he did not really mean it when he instructed pro-Trump demonstrators on J****** 6 to “Peacefully and patriotically march to the Capitol.”

Perhaps even the hint of encouraging any type of protest was reckless in such partisan times. But just days after violent protestors attacked Secret Service agents manning barricades and had sought to storm onto the White House grounds, did Trump boast to the nation of the ongoing demonstrations, as did Kamala Harris, soon to be a vice p**********l candidate?

They’re not going to stop. And everyone beware, because they’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop before E******n Day in November, and they’re not going to stop after E******n Day. And that should be—everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they’re not going to let up, and they should not, and we should not.

Was that a sober or i**********nary thing to advise in a summer of r**ting that saw 120 days of violence, $2 billion in damage, 35 dead, and hundreds of police officers injured?

Did Trump as president meet with CIA and FBI directors who, in their weekly and daily briefings, apprised him of efforts to monitor, spy, and infiltrate the campaign of Joe Biden?

Was there, after 2017, a Republican majority committee investigating the former Obama role in launching Operation Crossfire Hurricane, or Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s secret meeting with Bill Clinton while she was investigating Hillary Clinton? And if there were, would Obama loyalists in the House be excluded by the Republican speaker from participating in House investigations that also would allow no hostile or even neutral witnesses, no general counsel’s report, and no cross-examinations?

The strange thing about Trump was that he did not use extraordinary powers to investigate anyone unlawfully. He boasted, he railed, he screamed, he whined, he became at times crude and obnoxious. But he did not use the FBI, the CIA, the Justice Department, or the IRS to go after the Obamas, the Clintons, or the Bidens.

Instead, he became the most investigated, probed, smeared, and autopsied president in modern history. Trump’s legislative agenda did not include revolutionary changes in the E*******l College or the filibuster, or radical changes to the Supreme Court.

In fact, of the last three presidents, Trump was either the most inept or indifferent, or the most obstructed concerning any issue of using government agencies for his own partisan political advantages or to neuter his enemies.

In t***h, the entire apparatus of permanent government—the Pentagon hierarchy, the Washington elites at the FBI and CIA, the permanently entrenched at the Justice Department, and the apparat at the IRS all despised Donald Trump. And they did not just h**e him but acted on their antipathy by using their powers of government to destroy his campaign in 2016, to undermine his t***sition, to either obstruct or sabotage his initiatives while president, and to hound him as an ex-president. As ex-felon and FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith put it of his own illegal effort to destroy a president, “Viva le [sic] resistance.” Is that the sort of FBI we want—a cadre of self-described revolutionaries?

Donald Trump was impeached for raising the question of Biden family corruption in Ukraine with the Ukrainian president and delaying offensive military aid that had never been approved by a Democratic president.

Evidence since Trump’s impeachment suggests he was prescient in his warning to the Kyiv government to stay out of domestic American politics. Everything thing we know since that 2021 impeachment v**e solidifies—not contradicts—Trump’s point that the Biden family was corrupt, and H****r B***n was receiving large sums of money from Ukraine and China solely because Joe Biden had been vice president and was seen as a possible or even likely future president worthy of such corrupt investment. Or to put it another way, why would those with contacts with the Ukrainian government ever pay millions to an incompetent, drug-addicted miscreant like H****r B***n, if not for pay-for-play influence?



In that context, Joe Biden’s early boast that he got a Ukrainian attorney general fired, most likely for probing too deeply matters involving his family, gives credence to Trump’s instincts. So does the fact that both Obama and Biden for a time stopped shipments of offensive weapons to Ukraine, while Trump for a time only delayed them but eventually gave them what they wished.



The result of this unprecedented effort to accuse Trump of using government f*****tically while f*****tically using government to destroy a president is all too clear in the destroyed careers who sought to undermine constitutional government. What John Brennan, James Clapper, Kevin Clinesmith, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Bruce Ohr, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and a host of retired f**g officers and intelligence operatives share is not just their venomous antipathy toward an elected president and their efforts rhetorically and often concretely to neuter him, but their subsequent disgrace even among those who once cheered them on.

Another outrageous claim for the loyal Magaites to blather over. Gobble, Gobble!

Perhaps you should send him some more money!


The Daily Beast
Trump Demands Either New E******n ‘Immediately’ or Make Him ‘Rightful’ President Now
Justin Baragona
Mon, August 29, 2022 at 1:40 PM·3 min read
In this article:


Former President Donald Trump on Monday took time off from melting down over the FBI executing a search warrant at his home to seize classified documents to demand that he be installed as commander-in-chief of the United States—22 months after he decisively lost the 2020 race.

The twice-impeached ex-president, though, did propose a “minimal solution” if he is not returned to the White House right away: Declare the 2020 v**e “irreparably c*********d” and hold a new one “immediately.”

In recent days, conservatives have latched onto remarks made by Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg about his social platform’s handling of the H****r B***n laptop story just ahead of the 2020 e******n. Appearing on Joe Rogan’s podcast, Zuckerberg revealed that the Justice Department had warned Facebook to “be vigilant” about “Russian propaganda” in the waning days of the e******n season.

While Zuckerberg specifically said the feds did not f**g the laptop as disinformation, he told Rogan that Facebook did limit the reach of the New York Post’s H****r B***n story on news feeds for a few days as fact-checkers determined whether it was true. Unlike Twitter, however, Facebook users were free to share the article on their pages.

Additionally, a recent survey by Technometrica Institute of Policy and Politics found that 79 percent of respondents believe that Trump would have likely defeated President Joe Biden if v**ers were told that the contents of the younger Biden’s laptop were genuine and not “Russian disinformation,” as had been suggested by the intelligence community.

Trump, who has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the 2020 p**********l e******n was “stolen” due to widespread e******n f***d, took to his troubled social media site T***h Social in order to amplify this latest talking point.

“So now it comes out, conclusively, that the FBI BURIED THE H****R B***N LAPTOP STORY BEFORE THE E******N knowing that, if they didn’t, ‘Trump would have easily won the 2020 P**********l E******n,’” the ex-president blared.

He continued: “This is massive FRAUD & E******N I**********E at a level never seen before in our Country. REMEDY: Declare the rightful winner or, and this would be the minimal solution, declare the 2020 E******n irreparably c*********d and have a new E******n, immediately!”

Earlier this year, longtime Trump ally and “Stop the Steal” advocate Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) revealed that the former president had privately pushed him to remove Biden from office, install Trump back into the White House, and hold a new special e******n. Trump would eventually rescind his endorsement for Brooks in the Alabama Senate race for going “woke” by telling Republicans to move on from the 2020 e******n.

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, pointed out last week that the “FBI shared general warnings about foreign interference—nothing specific about H****r B***n.” The bureau, for its part, has also said that while it provided companies with "foreign threat indicators to help them protect their platforms,” it “cannot ask, or direct, companies to take action on information received.”

Meanwhile, Trump’s latest f*****tic ranting comes just a day after Trump boosted top sycophant Sen. Lindsey Graham’s prediction that there would be “r**ts in the street” if the DOJ indicts the former president for mishandling classified information.

Read more at The Daily Beast.

Get the Daily Beast's biggest scoops and scandals delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now.

Stay informed and gain unlimited access to the Daily Beast's unmatched reporting. Subscribe now.