Exposing the real agenda behind the push for an Article V convention

[Arizona Freedom Alliance]

Watch and see what you think!

Exposing the real agenda behind the push for an Article V convention from Publius Huldah on Vimeo.

[Pat J]

Vaquero, I believe you just described the Common Law Grand Jury http://arizonafreedomalliance.ning.com/group/common-law-grand-jury.  That is exactly what can be done through this law.  I don't know where it stands now but it was going strong there for a while.  Maybe it's time to resurrect and use that.

[John5319]

The idea that the Judiciary is the real "balance" to the 3 equal branches of government today is a utopian fallacy. Each branch of our government has abdicated its responsibility to "We the People" and our forefathers intent within the Constitution itself. We have become a progressive society, one of lax morals, lack of integrity and ethics, and stupefied ignoramuses who believe that the government inalienable rights will save this nation's soul. It will not for it is the cause of our strife ... and enslavement BY Debt. Obama's new entitlement of "healthcare" made that wagon something all crave for as they jump on it "for care" BY a future Debt. They want "free care" to be the same as "freedom" and a citizen right that ... even Trump supports!!!  We are the frogs sitting in the kettle of warm, soon to be boiling, water. Limited government is no more ... it is a Centralized Authoritarian System that will not be denied under any circumstances short of all out civil strife.

[Eric Barnes]

John, do you see any method of changing the situation you describe?

[John5319]

Yes I do. An informed conservative electorate ... who understands the RESPONSIBILITY of the citizenry  ... to know what kind of nation and Constitution we were given by the geneses who put their names, and lives on that parchment called The Declaration of Independence. Do we need a new Declaration, or new clauses in the Constitution? No. We were given a "holy grail" of moral laws, and a guidance by citizens to form a government as a way to correct disunion among us. That disunion must be a healing movement ... WITHOUT ... changing the construction of our constitutionally limited federal representative Republic.  The idea that a "convention" would make us a more prefect union are deceiving us. Opening up ANY part of our constitution would leave us all at the hands of the politically connected deceivers behind closed doors, for there is no transparency by those who would re-write it, for they are the principle players of a political game of chance. If we improve the hearts of the citizens we don't need to change a heritage fought and paid for by the blood of patriots for what we already have it in writing, a process and a remedy for corruption. If only Jeff Sessions would act upon what we see in Washington!

[Mrs.Tif Morgan]

Publius Huldah, that is not her true name, its a aka, and she is a fake, this is what they are afraid of, the true meaning of the Constitution, before it was Incorporated and altered.

 This is what Convention Of States is about:

"The Founders expressed contempt for the tyranny of majority rule, and throughout our Constitution, they placed impediments to that tyranny. Two houses of Congress pose one obstacle to majority rule. That is, 51 senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators. The president can veto the wishes of 535 members of Congress".

[Mrs.Tif Morgan]

Oh- ps, her name is Joanna Ruth Scutari, not Publius Huldah, she was kind of weird, her family got into a bit of trouble, but seeing how most of the DNC are into "things", she fits right in.

[john powelson]

The President can not veto the wishes of all 535. It takes a super majority to override a veto but it has been done in the past. Please don't forget how ignorant the people have become. Even the more educated on this discussion are really not aware, or choose not to mention, how ignorant the majority of voters are and they are more likely to have at least some knowledge. This even fails to include those who do not vote or participate in the process at all. The movements including illegal aliens, ANTIFA, LBGTQ etc. have no idea what this country is supposed to be governed by or what it's documents should look like or include. How do you think we have a chance in the world of getting what we want which is what the original Constitution laid out in no uncertain terms. Who among us is as brilliant as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Samuel Adams etc. etc, that we can devise a law which the crooks and liars we send to Washington DC can not circumvent, misconstrue or redefine from a positions of authority we have sent them there to tend???

[Russell Sias]

I don't know (for sure)  what the outcome of an Art V would be.  I submit that neither does anyone else, at least till it is tried.  Certainly, our constitution is worth not taking any risk with it.

I keep asking when this subject cones up, a couple of questions  The first is what is it that we would want to change, that we do not already have a way to accomplish under our present constitution?  What is the goal?  The real one?

2nd, who is going to pick these delegates?  Congress, very likely.  How on earth would that help?  Say we allow just 2 delegates per state.  That would be 100 people across our country.  Now, be honest, I bet no one in this group can name even half that many whom they would trust to be on such a committee.  Actually trust.  Be honest here, we are wanting to put our constitution into the hands of whom?  My point is that everybody has their own pet peeve, and given a chance, would be really, really tempted to toll in their own special thing into the mix, right.  I have mine, you all have yours.  Mine, I know would be a good idea, but I don't know about yours, so that means I want on this committee, and i don't know about you!

I submit that it would be far better to start asking, no, demanding that our elected officials start representing those whom elect them.  I don't mean with bogus campaign promises, but with something beyond a yes, I support (whatever), but actually sponsor and push a bill to do whatever their constituents want them to do.  I am so sick and tired of crap like ...yes I will support repealing the 17th amendment... (f0r example) and then they never, ever, bother to sponsor the bill to force congress to consider such a bill.  BS, err, campaign promises should have some accountability attached to them.  WE, the people, accept bogus campaign promises. and then turn around next election cycle, vote in the con artist that lied to us last time around.  Why do we put up with this BS? Orin Hatch said he was not going to run but once.  That was 40 years ago!!!  (I am not suggesting that they pass something that we ask of them, but when they cannot even be bothered to submit the bill?  Not a chance this sort will EVER get my vote for reelection!!!)

The problem is not with our constitution, but with us.  WE, the people put up with this these career liars and deceives.  Why?  How would an Art. V change any of this?

One more gripe, who ever said that congress was a career position anyway?  It SHOULD NOT be!  WE, the voters have allowed this nonsense to happen, and an Art. V will not change us, it will only open to door to the unknown.

[marc]

I really like that.

[Eric Barnes]

So do I. :)

[Pat J]

Reality check: our elected officials are ignoring the Constitution already.  It's not much better than a piece of paper when those elected to protect it are only protecting their own backsides.  They are cowards and won't attempt to modify the constitution because, for some, they worry that opening the door to do anything with the constitution is an abomination.  Same as you mention here, Russell.   What if only those who have a long history with this organization - COS - could be the only delegates?  Why did the Founding Fathers include Art V?  Someone from the JB Society said it was an after thought.  Ridiculous on its face.  They did nothing regarding creating a country that was an afterthought. So back to the question: why is it there if not to be used in times like this when we are on the cusp of losing this country?  No one ever answers that question for me.  I don't have an answer except they expected a day would come when it was necessary.  My belief is we adhere to the entire document, not just to the parts with which we agree.

[Russell Sias]

And, setting aside that our leaders ALREADY ignore the constitution, I keep asking, what cannot be changed within our existing structure that would need an Art. V to change?  Go ahead, name me something...anything.  Give it a try.  I dare anyone to pick something.

Considering that I have NEVER had an answer to this question, what is the real goal of an Art. V?  I am willing to bet it is to toss out our entire constitution, NOT just something isolated within it, such as forcing congress to balance the budget.  Which is ludicrous on it's face.  They ALREADY ignore the constitution now, why not a new one as well?

These relative singular issues are ONLY the tool, not the underlying motivation.  What ever it is, it probably has to do with bigger issues, like subjecting the USA to be a subservient part of a one world government, socialism, or some such.  I do not see anything else that those that propose an Art. V need to accomplish. 

Can anyone see the ultimate goal as a one world government here?  I think I can.