Mark Levin suggests the States call an Article Five Amendment Convention

Top conservative radio talk show host, attorney and constitutional scholar Mark Levin announced the pending release of his new book, "The Liberty Amendments, Restoring the American Republic," this past Wednesday, July 10, 2013, during his regular broadcast. The book due out on or about August 13th of this year is sure to be well received and thoughtful exegesis regarding our Constitution, and in keeping with his best selling, "Liberty and Tyranny," as well as the more recent, "Ameritopia."

Levin previewed an argument under Article Five of the United States Constitution which expresses how the Constitution can be changed through the amendment process by using the traditional passage of a proposed amendment by two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate; then on to the several states for ratification. Once three-fourths of the states have ratified the proposed amendment, the approved Amendment becomes part of our United States Constitution.

What Levin also said was that the States could also propose a convention to add a specific amendment or reject a current amendment by calling an Amendment Convention. This convention would have no bearing on the existing framework of the Constitution, but would only affect the addition or subtraction of an amendment at hand.



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/radio_host_mark_levin_s... 

Views: 1485

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Your efforts are appreciated! Sharing ideas is what made this country great.

 Do you really think the leftists who WILL PRESIDE and control that convention would allow any amendments that would stop them?  Guess again. Be careful or you'll be helping them destroy the Constitution by giving them the opportunity to do so. (at that very constitutional convention) They will throw The Constitution out. They WILL.

Oren....Just to confirm your point....I learned long ago from reading your posts....you, in fact, don't have not only all the answers...but very few of them. IMHO. Jack

Was that really called for?

Let's see....If it wasn't called for....I wouldn't have posted it.....so.....what is your question/point?? Maybe ya don't have one. No response required or needed.

OK...when the left runs out of facts....they shut up...Thanks. 

Thanks for the "warning" Terri. Might be helpful not to pick and choose based on some unknown bias you have. 

BTW...this comment is just for you....you don't have to post it. JLS

No bias?? That should be determined by someone other than you. Thanks for the latest of several warnings. Goodbye!!

Oren I've found two good ways to deal with personal attacks:

1. Ignore the attack completely. If there's any substance to discuss, do that, but without mentioning the attack. OR,

2. Respond to the attack lightheartedly; something like "Gee I've never been called a slice off the same turd as McCain before." AND THEN deal with the substance.

Real hard core personal attacks -- the kind that make you think do I need a rabies shot -- I usually ignore. These foaming at the mouth type actions rarely have enough substance to be worth an answer. Moderators will generally step in on those.

Too bad the idiots who are in power now would preside over such a convention. They would throw out The Constitution of The United States of America along with the Bill of Rights rights and we'll all be forced to live under the boot of some kind of socialist police state HELL. NO thanks.
We all need to be very, very careful of what we allow them to do. A Constitutional Convention while they're still in charge is an EXTREMELY DANGEROUS idea. They the socialists would preside over it and we would get less than nothing. There may soon be a time but it is NOT while they are in charge.

That's why we have the Second Amendment and it's about time to implement it.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Gary VarvelPolitical Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

ALERT ALERT

Judicial Watch->  Emails Show Dossier-Connected Obama State Dept Officials Set ‘Face-To-Face’ Meeting On ‘Russian Matter’ Shortly Before 2016 Election

Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation on Thursday released 84 pages of documents showing Obama’s State Department was central to pushing the ‘Trump-Russia’ hoax shortly before the 2016 election.

The email exchange between then-Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Special Coordinator for Libya Jonathan Winer, a very close associate to Christopher Steele, show them discussing a ‘face-to-face’ meeting in New York on a ‘Russian matter’ in September of 2016.

Via Judicial Watch:

Judicial Watch and The Daily Caller News Foundation today released 84 pages of documents, including a September 2016 email exchange between then-Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Special Coordinator for Libya Jonathan Winer, a close associate of dossier author Christopher Steele, discussing a “face-to-face” meeting on a “Russian matter.”

(In June 2016 Nuland permitted a meeting between Steele and the FBI’s legal attaché in Rome. Nuland told CBS News that the State Department knew about the Steele dossier by July 2016.)

According to an op-ed Winer wrote for The Washington Post in 2018, also in September 2016, “Steele and I met in Washington and discussed the information now known as the “dossier… I prepared a two-page summary and shared it with Nuland, who indicated that, like me, she felt that the secretary of state needed to be made aware of this material.”

A September 17, 2016, email exchange between Nuland and Winer – that was classified in the interest of national defense or foreign policy – discusses the political situation in Libya, but also brings up a “Russian matter:”

From: Winer, Jonathan
Sent: September 17, 2016 at 12:40:00 PM EDT
To: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Libya Update

Would like to discuss this and a Russian matter.

From: Nuland, Victoria J
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 1:31 PM
To: Winer, Jonathan
Subject: Re. Libya Update

In ny face to face?

From: Winer, Jonathan
Sent: September 17, 2016 at 1:56:05 PM EDT
To: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Libya Update

Yes that was [sic] be good.

From: Nuland, Victoria J
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 1:58 PM
To: Winer, Jonathan
Subject: Re. Libya Update

Good. I’ll reach out when im there Sunday. [Redacted]

If Victoria Nuland’s name sounds familiar it’s because she has been on Judicial Watch’s radar for a long time and in many of TGP’s previous reports.

In December 2018, Judicial Watch released documents revealing that Victoria Nuland was involved in the Obama State Department’s urgent gathering of classified Russia investigation information and disseminating it to members of Congress within hours of Donald Trump taking office.

In a related lawsuit, Judicial Watch is suing the State Department communications between Ambassador Nuland and employees of Fusion GPS, as well as top ranking Department of Justice, FBI, and State Department officials.

“The Obama State Department was central to the effort to target President Trump with the Russia smear,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These new emails further show that senior Obama State Department advanced the Russiagate hoax just before the 2016 presidential election.”

Tom Fitton   @TomFitton
 

BREAKING: Obama State Department was central to the effort to target President @RealDonaldTrump with the Russia smear. New emails show how senior Obama State Department advanced the Russiagate hoax just before the 2016 presidential election.

Embedded video

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service