Publius-Huldah's Blog

Understanding the Constitution

COS Project’s “Simulated Convention” Dog and Pony Show and What They Did There

By Publius Huldah

1. Foundational Knowledge

Our Constitution delegates only a handful of powers to the federal government. But 100 years ago, we started electing Progressives (Fabian socialists) to State and federal office. With the enthusiastic approval of the American People, the Progressives set up the socialist regulatory welfare governments (state and federal) we now have. It’s unconstitutional; but Americans didn’t care because they were being taken care of by the governments, and their children were getting “free” public school educations.

So for the past 100 years, the federal and state governments and the American People have ignored our Constitution.

Now that our socialist system is collapsing, along comes the “Convention of States” Project (COSP), blames all our problems on the federal government, and claims we can fix the federal government’s violations of our Constitution by amending the Constitution. 1

And they say amendments which will “rein in the abuse of power by the federal government” when it “violate[s] its constitutional limitations”, 2 can be obtained only at a convention called by Congress pursuant to Article V of our Constitution.

Article V provides that if two thirds of the States apply for it, Congress shall call a convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution. 3 However, Delegates would have the right, as recognized in the 2nd paragraph of our Declaration of Independence, to throw off the Constitution we have and write a new Constitution which creates a new government. This has happened before!

Our first Constitution was the Articles of Confederation. It had defects, so on February 21, 1787, the Continental Congress called a convention to be held in Philadelphia “for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation”. But instead of proposing amendments, the Delegates wrote a new Constitution, with an easier mode of ratification, 4 which created a new government. In Federalist No. 40 (15th para), James Madison invoked the Delegates’ right to abolish our form of government, as recognized in the Declaration of Independence, to justify ignoring their instructions and drafting a new Constitution which created a new government.

So! Ever since the federal convention of 1787, it has been known that any convention called to address our Constitution under Article V provides the opportunity to impose a new Constitution. 5 That’s why the enemies of our Constitution periodically push for an Article V convention. 6

In response to the current push, constitutionalists are warning Americans that if Congress calls an Article V convention, a new constitution with a new mode of ratification is likely to be imposed – probably a new constitution which moves us into the North American Union.

2. COSP’s “simulated” Article V convention

So during September 2016, COSP held an “invitation only” “simulated convention” in Williamsburg, Virginia attended by State Legislators handpicked by COSP, 7 to show us that Delegates to a real Article V convention called by Congress will do nothing more than propose amendments.

And lo! At the “simulated convention”, all the handpicked invitees did was propose six amendments to our Constitution – they didn’t “run away” and propose a new Constitution with a new mode of ratification!

COSP would like us to believe that their “simulated convention” proves that a real Article V convention called by Congress also won’t run away when, in fact, it proves nothing except that handpicked COSP invitees fall in line with the COSP agenda.

Now let’s look at the proposed amendments: COSP posted them HERE; an archived copy is HERE.

3. COSP’s six amendments

Like Newspeak in George Orwell’s “1984, the amendments would do the opposite of what COSP claims.


Fiscal Restraints Proposal 1”:

“SECTION 1. The public debt shall not be increased except upon a recorded vote of two-thirds of each house of Congress, and only for a period not to exceed one year.

SECTION 2. No state or any subdivision thereof shall be compelled or coerced by Congress or the President to appropriate money.

* * *”

So! Congress can’t increase the debt unless they decide to increase the debt. Wow. This is “fiscal restraints”?

If you read through the Constitution and highlight the powers delegated to the federal government, you will get a list of the objects on which Congress is authorized to spend money.

The reason we have a huge debt is because for 100 years, Congress has been spending on objects which aren’t on the list of delegated powers. The States go along with it because they get federal funds for implementing unconstitutional federal programs in their States. 31.9% of the States’ annual revenues is from federal funds. All this federal money is borrowed and added to the public debt!

To say that State Legislators display hypocrisy when they decry “out of control federal spending” when they have their hand out for all the federal money they can get, is an understatement. The amendment authorizes such spending to continue for as long as Congress continues to approve increases in the debt! The amendment legalizes – makes constitutional – all such spending and debt increases!

Section 2 gives us nothing. Our existing Constitution doesn’t permit the federal government to require States or local governments to spend money.


Federal Legislative & Executive Jurisdiction Proposal 1:

“SECTION 1. The power of Congress to regulate commerce among the several states shall be limited to the regulation of the sale, shipment, transportation, or other movement of goods, articles or persons. Congress may not regulate activity solely because it affects commerce among the several states. [boldface added]

SECTION 2. The power of Congress to make all laws that are necessary and proper to regulate commerce among the several states, or with foreign nations, shall not be construed to include the power to regulate or prohibit any activity that is confined within a single state regardless of its effects outside the state, whether it employs instrumentalities therefrom, or whether its regulation or prohibition is part of a comprehensive regulatory scheme; but Congress shall have power to define and provide for punishment of offenses constituting acts of war or violent insurrection against the United States. [boldface added]

SECTION 3. The Legislatures of the States shall have standing to file any claim alleging violation of this article. Nothing in this article shall be construed to limit standing that may otherwise exist for a person.

* * *”

Section 1: The original intent of the interstate commerce clause (Art. I, §3) is to prohibit the States from imposing tolls & tariffs on merchandize as it is transported through the States for purposes of buying & selling; and to permit the federal government to impose duties on imports & exports, both inland & abroad. 8

With Roosevelt’s “New Deal”, the federal government began to pervert the original intent so as to exert power over whatever they wanted to regulate.

The amendment legalizes the perversions! It delegates to the federal government powers it has already usurped to regulate the sale, shipment, transportation, or other movement of goods and articles.

Furthermore: the amendment delegates to the federal government a sweeping new power over the movement or transportation of persons across state lines! It would, e.g., authorize the federal government to prohibit use of privately owned vehicles to cross state lines, and to require prior written permission to cross state lines. I saw in communist East Europe & the Soviet Union a system where governments control movement of persons. Will “Papers, please” be heard at checkpoints in America? This malignant amendment would be constitutional authority to impose such a system here. 9

Section 2: The federal government has no existing constitutional authority to regulate intra state commerce, so the first clause of this section adds nothing our Constitution doesn’t already prohibit.

But the second clause delegates to the federal government another significant new power over persons: it comes verbatim from Randy Barnett’s so-called “bill of federalism”: 10

“…Congress shall have power to define and provide for punishment of offenses constituting acts of war or violent insurrection against the United States.”

Why does Barnett, who attended the “simulated convention” as “Committee Advisor”, want the federal government to have this new power? What’s an “act of war against the United States” – doing what the Bundys and their supporters did? The amendment delegates to Congress the power to define “acts of war against the United States” – and to re-define it from time to time – to encompass whatever they want!

We need to understand the implications of delegating such power to Congress. As with “treason” under the Tudors in England, anyone can be accused of “acts of war against the United States”. Does Randy Barnett, law professor, understand the implications? James Madison understood them and thus said that “treason” must be defined in the Constitution; 11 obviously, no one of Madison’s caliber was at the “simulated convention”.

Section 3: Our Framers didn’t advise the States to file lawsuits against the federal government when it violates the Constitution! Our Framers told the States to nullify such violations. 12


Federal Term Limits & Judicial Jurisdiction Proposal 1”:

“No person shall be elected to more than six full terms in the House of Representatives. No person shall be elected to more than two full terms in the Senate. These limits shall include the time served prior to the enactment of this Article.”

This amendment is a feel-good palliative which caters to Americans’ pervasive desire for a quick “fix” which permits them to avoid dealing with the real causes of their problems. See Term Limits: A Palliative not a Cure.


Federal Legislative & Executive Jurisdiction Proposal 2”:

“SECTION 1. The Legislatures of the States shall have authority to abrogate any provision of federal law issued by the Congress, President, or Administrative Agencies of the United States, whether in the form of a statute, decree, order, regulation, rule, opinion, decision, or other form. [boldface added]

SECTION 2. Such abrogation shall be effective when the Legislatures of three-fifths of the States approve a resolution declaring the same provision or provisions of federal law to be abrogated. This abrogation authority may also be applied to provisions of federal law existing at the time this amendment is ratified.

* * *”

Section 1: Article I, §1, US Constitution, provides that all legislative powers granted by the Constitution shall be vested in Congress. Only Congress may make laws [and laws are restricted to the powers granted in the Constitution].

Accordingly, executive orders and federal agency rules and orders are not “law”.

The amendment would supersede Art. I, §1. It would elevate to the status of “federal law” every order or regulation burped out by bureaucrats in the executive branch; every executive order signed by every President; and every order barked out by jack-booted thugs working for federal agencies. And unless three fifths of States agree that you don’t have to obey – you must obey or bear the consequences of violating what would be – thanks to this amendment – “federal law”.

Section 2: James Madison, Father of our Constitution, showed how individual States or several States could carry out resistance to the federal government’s unconstitutional encroachments. But the amendment would require 30 States to agree before any one State or person could defend itself!


Fiscal Restraints Proposal 2:

SECTION 1. Congress shall not impose taxes or other exactions upon incomes, gifts, or estates.

SECTION 2. Congress shall not impose or increase any tax, duty, impost or excise without the approval of three-fifths of the House of Representatives and three-fifths of the Senate, and shall separately present such to the President. [boldface added]

SECTION 3. This Article shall be effective five years from the date of its ratification, at which time the Sixteenth Article of amendment is repealed.”

This amendment doesn’t impose “fiscal restraints” – it authorizes Congress to impose new and different taxes on us!

The words in boldface authorize Congress to impose “any tax” if three fifths of both Houses agree. “Any tax” includes a national sales tax and a national value added tax (VAT). Statists love the VAT because it raises a “gusher of revenue for spendthrift governments”. This is what will replace the income, gift, and estate tax.


Federal Legislative & Executive Jurisdiction Proposal 3”:

“Whenever one quarter of the members of the United States House of Representatives or the United States Senate transmits to the President their written declaration of opposition to any proposed or existing federal administrative regulation, in whole or in part, it shall require a majority vote of the House of Representatives and Senate to adopt or affirm that regulation. Upon the transmittal of opposition, if Congress shall fail to vote within 180 days, such regulation shall be vacated. No proposed regulation challenged under the terms of this Article shall go into effect without the approval of Congress. Congressional approval or rejection of a rule or regulation is not subject to Presidential veto under Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution.”

As shown in The “Regulation Freedom” Amendment and Daniel Webster, rulemaking by federal agencies is unconstitutional as in violation of Art. I, §1 of our Constitution.

The proposed amendment would supersede Art. I, §1 and legalize such rulemaking! And the existing Code of Federal Regulations and the rulemaking process itself – which now violate the Constitution – would be made constitutional!

The solution to the burden created by unconstitutional federal agencies is to do away with the agencies! Downsize the federal government to its enumerated powers!

4. Conclusion

The “simulated convention” was a dog and pony show put on to produce amendments to con us into believing that a real Article V convention called by Congress won’t “run away”.

But it’s impossible to fix federal usurpations of non-delegated powers with amendments, because amendments can’t take away powers the Constitution didn’t delegate in the first place. Thus, the amendments the hand-picked attendees approved legalize powers already usurped or delegate sweeping new powers to the federal government over States and individual persons!

Statecraft is serious business which requires systematic study to master. The “simulated convention” shows we live in a time of constitutional illiteracy where people of good intent can be misled by persons of “insidious views”. Heed the words of Daniel Webster in his 4th of July Oration, 1802:

“The politician that undertakes to improve a Constitution with as little thought as a farmer sets about mending his plow, is no master of his trade. If that Constitution be a systematic one, if it be a free one, its parts are so necessarily connected that an alteration in one will work an alteration in all; and this cobbler, however pure and honest his intentions, will, in the end, find that what came to his hands a fair and lovely fabric goes from them a miserable piece of patchwork.”


1 If your spouse commits adultery, will your marriage be saved if you amend the vows to permit adultery? When People violate the Ten Commandments, will morality be restored if we amend the Ten Commandments to permit sin?

2 Michael Farris’ words in “Answering the John Birch Society Questions about Article V” or HERE.

3 None of the Delegates to the convention of 1787 said the purpose of amendments is to rein in the fed. gov’t when it usurps power. They said the purpose is to fix defects in the Constitution. See The George Mason Fabrication at subheading 4.

4 Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation (AOC) required Amendments to the AOC to be ratified by the Continental Congress and all of the then 13 States. But Article VII of the new Constitution (the one we now have) provided that it would be ratified by 9 States.

5 The enemies of our Constitution knew from day one that they could get rid of our Constitution at an Art. V convention! Our present Constitution was ratified by the 9th State on June 21, 1788. In Federalist No. 85 (mid-August 1788), Hamilton addressed the arguments of the anti-federalists who were agitating for another convention in order to get rid of our new Constitution.

On Oct. 27, 1788, anti-federalist Patrick Henry introduced into the Virginia Assembly a Resolution asking Congress to call an Art. V convention. In Madison’s letter to Randolph of Nov 2, 1788 (pages 294-297), he speaks of Henry’s “enmity” “agst [against] the whole system” [the new Constitution]; and “the destruction of the whole system I take to be still the secret wish of his heart, and the real object of his pursuit.”

6 New Constitutions are already prepared or being drafted: e.g., the Constitution for the Newstates of America is ratified by a national referendum (Art. XII, §1). Globalists [e.g., the Council on Foreign Relations] who want to move us into the North American Union (NAU) need a new Constitution to transform us from a sovereign nation to a member state in the NAU.

7 COSP’s page is archived HERE. See “who attended the simulation” in right column. [Archived list of attendees is HERE or HERE.]

8 Proof of the original intent of the interstate commerce clause & how it was abused is HERE.

9 Yet, Legislators from 44 of the States at the “simulated convention” approved this!

10 See Barnett’s Amendment 2 – Limits of Commerce Power”. It’s archived HERE.

11 “Treason” is defined at Art. III, §3. In Federalist No. 43 (at 3.) Madison warns that the definition must be locked into the Constitution. Otherwise, malignant people fabricate definitions as needed in order to condemn their enemies.

Compare Art. I, §8, cl. 10 which delegates to Congress the power “To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations”. In Federalist No. 42 (1st & 4th paras), Madison points out that this class of powers is among those which “regulate the intercourse with foreign nations” and so must be handled by the general [fed.] gov’t. And since everyone’s definition of the terms is different, the fed gov’t should define them. This class of powers wouldn’t affect private Citizens. For more on the limited criminal jurisdiction of the fed gov’t over private Citizens, see What Criminal Laws are Congress Authorized To Make?

12 See Nullification made Easy. And remember: State officials are required by the Oath at Art. VI to “support” the federal Constitution – not to obey the federal government!

Add to DeliciousAdd to DiggAdd to FaceBookAdd to Google BookmarkAdd to MySpaceAdd to NewsvineAdd to RedditAdd to StumbleUponAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Twitter

January 14, 2018 - Posted by | Article V Convention, Code of Federal Regulations, Commerce clause, Convention of States project, Daniel Webster, dog and pony show, Fabian socialism, fabian socialists, James Madison, Michael Farris, Newspeak, Randy Barnett, simulated convention | , , , , , , , , ,


  1. […] [link]; ‘COS Project’s “simulated convention” dog and pony show and what they did there’ [link], & ‘The “Regulation Freedom” Amendment and Daniel Webster’ […]


    Pingback by Publius Huldah: When the feds violate the Constitution, should we blame the Constitution? – Lower Valley Assembly | March 24, 2021 | Reply

  2. […] Project’s “simulated convention” dog and pony show and what they did there’ [link], & ‘The “Regulation Freedom” Amendment and Daniel Webster’ […]


    Pingback by When the feds violate the Constitution, should we blame the Constitution? « Publius-Huldah's Blog | March 21, 2021 | Reply

  3. Thanks to you, I was able to see THROUGH the COS fraud! When Mark Levin started pushing this, I was for it; it sounded like a good idea. Then again, many things sound good on the drive home from work!

    However, when you presented your faultless logic on this, I wondered how anyone could miss your point. If the federal gov’t is disobeying (dare I say flouting) the Constitution now, then what makes anyone think that they’d obey and follow the revised Constitution? What makes anyone think that Mark Levin’s “Liberty Amendments” would make a difference? That was so obvious that it escaped me!

    I noticed that Mr. Levin belittles anyone who disagrees with him on the COS; I noticed that he never addresses the objections in a meaningful way. For example, one night a guy called raising the objection (a very real one, I think) about a possible runaway convention. Levin just shouted the guy down; never once have I heard him address the historical example of how our PRESENT Constitution came into being, i.e. started as a revision to the Articles of Confederation. I’ve tried to call to raise this objection, but I haven’t gotten through.

    Anyway, keep up the good work! I wish you could post more often.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by MarkyMark | March 22, 2018 | Reply

    • Well, then you can think! But keep it up – thinking is a round the clock job and a whole lot of Americans better start thinking now. Or there will be hell to pay.
      during legislative season, I have little time to post here or write articles.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | March 30, 2018 | Reply

  4. 1. Foundational Knowledge – “free” public school education

    “Dr. Duke Pesta on the Dangers of Government Schools”
    Agency Based Education – Published on October 6, 2017


    Comment by Merry Christmas | March 15, 2018 | Reply

  5. Another great analysis of the COS fraud by Publius Huldah. You only need to ask one question: who’s in control of the US today? Those in control will control the COS process – not the blowhard Farris and his merry misled associates. And as for Farris, I had assumed he was so full of himself his ego got in the way of his common sense. But now I believe he one of the globalist, deep state community which seeks to roll the US into a world government – with His Majesty at or near the top.

    The deep state will control the COS process. Farris should stop playing “Founding Father”. I know the Founding Fathers and he is no Founding Father. Not even close.

    Robert Heiney 770-358-4777 talk/text JBS/Barnesville


    Comment by Writeheiney | January 23, 2018 | Reply

    • yes, I believe that Farris is on the dark side. His so-called “parental rights” amendment delegates power over children to the federal and state governments. His followers are too stupid to see that; but he knows what he is doing.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 23, 2018 | Reply

  6. Hannity is pushing for an article five on his show,Hannity from Fox News


    Comment by Union News page too much FB Censure | January 18, 2018 | Reply

    • Hannity always was dumber than a rock.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 18, 2018 | Reply

  7. Thank you!! Big help, again!! Needed the refresher about WHY COS is NOT a good idea! Thank you, PH!
    It encourages me to remember the many times in the Bible God uses a few, and then not especially experts in the field (of war, or whatever the need) to prevent the need to go to war, or else for the righteous (ie, believers) to be victorious over their enemies who were much greater than they were.
    The idea being that God wants us who know Him to keep in mind, as He spoke in Zechariah 4:6 “‘Not by (man’s) might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’ saith the Lord of hosts.” YEAH!!
    God powerfully provided the lad David to successfully go up against and prevail over the giant Goliath AND the vicious army behind him!! It was God’s ability (not David’s slingshot ability!!) that caused David to prevail! David didn’t know HOW God would do it, but he trusted God to guide him, and that God would (somehow) bring the victory!!
    I believe that is what our Founding Fathers did, trusting they were being led by God to throw off the tyranny that was preventing them from living as God desires human beings to live. I believe the ‘God Trusting’ shepherd boy David, as well as our (mostly) Bible believing Christian Founding Fathers, TRUSTED GOD to guide him step by step as to what to do, by God’s ability, to be victorious over those trying to bring their own tyrannical rule upon them!
    I believe that is also God’s answer for us today!
    “Then David said to the Philistine, “You come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have taunted. This day the Lord will deliver you up into my hands, and I will strike you down and remove your head from you. And I will give the dead bodies of the army of the Philistines this day to the birds of the sky and the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that the Lord does not deliver by sword or by spear; for the battle is the Lord’s and He will give you into our hands.” … “And David put his hand into his bag and took from it a stone and slung it, and struck the Philistine on his forehead. And the stone sank into his forehead, so that he fell on his face to the ground!! (1 Samuel 17:45-47,49 )
    Thank you, again, and stay encouraged, sweet lady! God is using you greatly!
    “Nothing is too difficult for the Lord!!” (Luke 1:37) who loves us all, extremely!!


    Comment by jesusvictorious | January 17, 2018 | Reply

    • Amen, and thank you, Sister! I appreciate the parallel with David and Goliath. I got a sling shot – the COS Project has an endless supply of Koch money.

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 17, 2018 | Reply

      • Thank you!! “Do not grow weary in doing good… !” God will bring the victory! TY!!


        Comment by jesusvictorious | January 23, 2018 | Reply

  8. A frequently heard observation is that the equal of the group of Framers who attended the 1787 convention — and who thus gave us our current Constitution — will never again be seen. I have heard and agreed with this countless times. BUT . . .

    Another observation just occurred to me which I think should be partnered with the one just cited. It’s that the caliber of the average American citizen in 1787 — in terms of character, self-responsibility, ambition, work ethic, honest, self-motivation, reliability, COMMON SENSE, love for personal freedom, loyalty to his values, courage, and many other virtues — will probably never again be equalled either. Not that every American had all those virtues, but more of them had most of these virtues than probably any other nation in history.

    There were reasons why the “New World” — the USA — began its life being almost universally regarded as a “heaven on earth” for any and every honest human being. The gradual attack on and changes induced into the “American character” over the past century-plus, have destroyed a nation of citizens whose love for their nation was at least as great as any other nation has ever enjoyed, and more important, it was for better and greater reasons than any other nation’s patriotism has ever stood upon.

    A massive job of re-educating our citizenry is, in my opinion, the only really reliable hope for the preservation of the ideas (and the miraculous successes those ideas enabled) — ideas which were introduced to the world for the first time via the greatest and most fundamental and most significant political revolution in all human history — the ideas which created the greatest nation in the history of the world, The United States of America.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Morry M. | January 15, 2018 | Reply

    • Amen, Morry! The only solution is a massive moral and intellectual regeneration.

      Many Americans are fond of blame-shifting to the federal government. But we have the federal government the People voted for.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 15, 2018 | Reply

  9. GREAT article as usual. Hard to come up with sufficiently praiseworthy adjectives to describe it.

    Thank you, PH.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Morry M. | January 15, 2018 | Reply

    • Well, Morry – you can always try!

      PS: I want chocolate. I can’t buy it b/c I’m on a diet. So I depend on the kindness of friends….

      Seriously, thank you. Much effort goes into those papers – as I expect you know.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 15, 2018 | Reply

  10. Well said! A great deal of effort is being put behind this effort for a COS. The effort is accompanied by matching ignorance and deception. Thanks.


    Comment by Mike Foil | January 15, 2018 | Reply

    • Also, as you have pointed out many times, how can an amendment correct the disregard for present amendments? Adding more amendments to the Constitution will not make those in government obedient to its limitations, which they currently ignore.

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Mike Foil | January 15, 2018 | Reply

      • Please start educating the legislators in your State. The Republicans there are a gullible or cowardly bunch. Some of them voted last year for the COS & BBA applications for an Article V convention, and for Compact for America’s new taxes amendment because….. the little weaklings “got their arms twisted”.

        I say, if they are too cowardly to stand up to bullies and to arm twisting, then they are worthless human beings fit for the garbage dump. We sent them lots of information. Unlike Legislators in other states, they totally ignored what we sent them.

        Oh! I forgot to say, Nice to hear from you! It’s been a while. Hope all is well.


        Comment by Publius Huldah | January 15, 2018 | Reply

  11. I notice that Mark Levin who supports all of this false help for the folks wanting term limits and a balanced budget, etc, etc, wasn’t making any helpful suggestions here. Although he has been very vocal against the Birchers, who he must hate for his own reasons and for the amendment being presented here.


    Comment by donald vice (@gadonv) | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  12. I believe the COS Project is being promoted by the Deep State. The CFR has stated “there must be an end run around the Constitution.” Jim

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Jim SALLEE | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  13. This is really depressing, so what is the solution power the Farmers have in mind today ? Just sayin?

    To Throw off said government and install a new one ? By what method ?




    Comment by SFH | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  14. States had a right to refuse to ratify our Constitution and if they refused they were free to form their own confederation. A new Constitution forming a North American Union or other absurdity may or may not offer the same opportunity but regardless many states would refuse to ratify and and they would then form their own confederation. Hard and bloody times for certain but for many it would be worth it to be removed from such a new America.


    Comment by Don Mellon | January 14, 2018 | Reply

    • No Don. You don’t see the extent of the perfidy, and so would be defenseless. A new Constitution will have its own new mode of ratification. Didn’t I make that point clear? Our Constitution of 1787 set forth a new mode of ratification (9 of the then 13 States). How is the Constitution for the Newstates of America ratified? [I said in the article.]

      A constitution wherein we are moved into the NAU will have its own new mode of ratification. It can be anything the drafters deem to be a sure thing.

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  15. Reblogged this on Starvin Larry.


    Comment by gamegetterII | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  16. I agree with you position. The only reason these goof balls are proposing such things is because they have no clue what the Constitution means. The inmates want to control the asylum and it will go badly.

    The Debates and the Federalist Papers are the details and these bozos don’t understand what they mean. It’s like navigation. If you don’t know where you are, fix your position, you have no idea where you are going.

    I spoke to their attorney. He was all about an amendment stating that congress can’t make laws that they are not subject to. I pointed out that it already exists. The Framers spoke on the subject for three days during the Debates. They concluded that there could be no Aristocracy. Madison restated this in Federalist 57. I told the attorney this. He said yeah but they are not going to abide by that. He said that they had to create the amendment so they would. I told him no this is the legislative history, so to speak, and it is the intent…. He was not moved.

    This guy was all about his idea and the Convention and how they were going to do this great thing.

    From our very recent experience, the FBI scandle, the hijacking of the general government by the employees and the total disregard of these critters for the respect due the Constitution shows one thing. Those in governmentand those pulling their strings are not going to let this convention dethrone them. They will infiltrate and compromise this joke of a convention. They will hijack it if they can and they will destroy our Republic.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Dennis | January 14, 2018 | Reply

    • I’m giving most of the Legislators who attended the dog and pony show the benefit of the doubt – and am assuming that they just blindly trusted the attorneys [law professors] who were there. and so rubber-stamped what they did.

      But some of the state legislators there – like the reprehensible Ken Ivory (attorney) of Utah – are paid hacks: See Ivory’s financial disclosure statement: While a Utah State Legislator, his employers are Mark Meckler’s organizations. Ivory was the “president” of the “simulated convention”.

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  17. Just as the so-called “Patriot” Act was waiting on the shelf for implementation, the ‘new-improved’ contitution is likely already written and waiting for the right terrorism control drama to occur. Why won’t we get a peek at this document to consider the desirability of discarding The Constitution?

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by rediscover911com | January 14, 2018 | Reply

    • The Newstates Constitution has been out there for 50 years. I put in the link – do read it.

      We have a good idea what the new constitution which moves us into the North American Union will look like: READ and save the Task Force Report on the NAU. Get it before they take it down again.

      The new Constitution won’t be imposed as a terrorism control mechanism. They need an Article V convention to propose it. And since it will have whatever mode of ratification they want, it is sure to be approved [ratified]. Then, it’s “Goodbye, Sweet America”.

      Hello, European Union.

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  18. The danger of the COS trojan horse is frightening. I will spread this article far and wide, as I do with every article from Publius Huldah. “A word to the wise” will go where there’s reception. “Repetition” will go where it’s needed.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by marlene | January 14, 2018 | Reply

    • What is SCARY is that those State legislators thought these amendments were a great idea!

      Sadly, where “reception” is lacking; “repetition” is needed.

      and Aristotle said “Man is a rational animal”. He didn’t know Americans. They have become dufflepuds.

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Publius Huldah | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  19. Yep ok I saw an article on it a week ago or so but need time to read it, read this, Thank You.




    Comment by SFH | January 14, 2018 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: