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.
By Neil Munro11 Jan 20165
House Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) 56% may become the GOP establishment’s 2016 candidate who can snatch the nomination or the leadership of the GOP away from pro-American populist Donald Trump, according to D.C. media chatter.
But the move — if it happens — may be too late.
Any fight between the increasingly popular Trump and the decreasingly popular Ryan would mark a last-ditch effort by the GOP’s establishment-business-wing to deny any political power to its conservative voters, likely splitting the party just before the elections that will decide which party gets to control the White House and the U.S. Senate. It might also damage Ryan’s long-term career plans, which are already being undermined by his unpopular policies and his complete failure in the 2016 budget negotiations, despite his support in the establishment media.
The media suggestions for Ryan suddenly appeared Sunday, Jan 10.
In a Daily Beast article about the media’s desire for a political fight at the GOP convention, veteran reporter Jeff Greenfield casually suggested the GOP’s establishment might sabotage Trump at the last moment by using the convention to give the nomination to Ryan, who was defeated in 2012 when he ran as the vice-president candidate with Gov. Mitt Romney.
“If party elders were to meet behind closed doors and deliver the nomination to, say, House Speaker Paul Ryan, that would qualify as a ‘brokered’ outcome,” Greenfield wrote Jan. 10.
Tai Kopan, a writer for CNN, floated Ryan as the media-backed silver bullet against Trump during a Jan. 10 article about a weekend event that showcased Ryan’s much-touted efforts to win more votes from lower-income Americans.
In rare joint appearances, six Republican presidential candidates gathered here on Saturday to talk about ways to address poverty in America, speaking to voters in the crucial early primary state and beyond about why the GOP has the best answers.
House Speaker Paul Ryan and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) 88% were moderators, and they questioned former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 79% in small groups about how to address systemic problems at the Kemp Forum on Expanding Opportunity….
Not all of the applications are formatted with limits...that's my point. Without all States in agreement the convention is not bound to the rules of a few ... or even a majority... unless they are codified by law or in a legal compact.
I don't trust anyone when it comes to Amending the Constitution I want guarantees in writing that limit the scope and establish general rules for the convention before or simultaneously with approving a convention.
I have not vacillated at all... it has always been my desire to have written guarantees regarding the scope and rules for the convention... that limit its scope and provide general guidelines for its conduct... before it is convened.
And yes, I don't trust politicians and I certainly don't trust them with the keys to the Constitution.
More garbage from the GOP.
You will not hear Hillary talk about this.
Irregardless of our differences, we had better stand together on issues such as this.
This is a very serious threat to life on earth.
This sort of a weapon in the hands of a madman.
Is the Ayatolla the next to possess such a devastating weapon ?
Both of these countries are run by suicidal maniacs.
Remember "Black-Out" tonight.
Yes, I remember.
Ha Ha No Way Mr.Ryan don't you get it? NO Establishment!
This is the enemy.
Any collective endeavor needs to have a framework of guidelines and parameters to be comprehensive, limited, and successful.
I agree wholeheartedly with Colonel Nelson's statement,
“I don't trust anyone when it comes to Amending the Constitution .
I want guarantees in writing that limit the scope and establish general
rules for the convention before or simultaneously with approving a convention.” And again I will add that I see absoluitely nothing in what you propose that will prevent the ceative neerdowells from violating their Oath of Office. Term limits ? That is saying, that one of these sorts of cretins can go ahead and continue to do is or her dirty work till the end of the term. And if they are eligible for another term , we will vote them out. Wow, that will show them not to mess with us. I say BS, Make the Oath of Office be taken on the Holy Bible, only (so we do not get another Muslim) and make it an act of treason to violate it. Bang, 90% of the problems we have seen for the last at least 3 decades, will disappear.
"The Convention rules have been largely hammered out in the three Assembly of States meetings at Mount Vernon. They cannot be formally adopted until there is an actual Convention of States Convention. "
That statement is both inaccurate and avoids addressing one of the key elements necessary to keeping a Convention on course and from becoming a runaway Convention. Those states not at the Assembly of States will simply have to catch up. The Application for the Convention should contain the basis for limiting the scope and purpose of the Convention.... and must be part of every application or it becomes invalid; being open debate, should even one state fails to agree.
In addition a 'Compact' between the 50 State's establishing the general rules of order for the Convention are needed... They can use standard parliamentary rules such as ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER and establish how delegates will be seated, how many delegates per state are permitted and how committees chairs will be assigned, etc..
We don't need to be taking unnecessary chances with our Constitution.
If a simple set of general rules and limiting the scope by formal agreement ... is impossible to achieve in writing before the Convention is convened, then something is wrong... and with the crooked and unscrupulous political class we have today, that something, can turn out to be desasterous. We need all 50 State Legislatures to sign on to a legally binding compact, that outlines the basic rules and limits the scope of the Convention.
Agreement to a general set of rules can occur before the Convention... and then be formally adopted at the Convention. And yes the Convention can be a runaway convention... the ratification process is a separate process. A runaway convention's proposed amendments must be ratified (approved) before being adopted... that is a totally different action.
The Ratification process is not part of the Convention... once the States Convention proposes amendments its job is done... it then falls to the State Legislatures to ratify the Proposed Amendments or too reject them. Don't confuse the two processes. Hence, a runaway convention would require the State's to reject any bad Amendments it proposed. That's two different processes.