Skip to main content

Plan for Taking "America Back"

Here is constitutional lawyer Scott Lively's plan for taking "America back": 

1) We focus on organizing our people into a national grassroots network in 2021 and 22 (I’ve started my own model for this called Swamp Rangers) with emphasis on local and state politics.  

2) We set our sights on MAGA control of 3/4 of the states, emphasizing the issue of election integrity in every state, and also taking back control of the House of Representatives in 2022, making every race a referendum on election integrity.

3) In 2023 we use our control of the state legislatures to convene a Convention of States per Article 5, Option 2, to strip the federal government of powers we did not delegate to it, restore the parts of the constitution that the left has neutralized over the past century, add new amendments for a balanced budget, term limits and election integrity, and strip the Supreme Court of power to thwart the will of We the People as established by this convention.

4). With constitutional originalism and limitations on federal power restored, we take back the Congress and the Presidency in 2024.  

The centerpiece of this plan is the Article 5 Convention of States, which conservatives should not confuse with the “runaway Constitutional Convention of 1787" when this nation was called the “Confederation of States,” not the “United States.” No Article 5 Convention of States has EVER been held, but the option can be assumed to be a safe process since it was deliberately adopted by the Founders in 1789 as a part of the brand new United States Constitution, which was written by the Founders specifically to fix the problems raised in and by 1787 event when those problems were still fresh in their minds.

Now that the entire federal government has been hijacked by the left, the genius of the founders in including a Convention of States in Article 5 is now made clear. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 85, it’s purpose was to provide a mechanism to "erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority." The Marxists now have absolute top-down authority that will be impossible to break by traditional means. But the Founders gave us a back-door to solve this very problem. My plan is to use it to the fullest to restore citizen controls from the bottom up. [To join send an email to scottlivelyministries@gmail.com and you will be added to list to receive the invite to the Google Groups room. Paused for January. Resumes in February}

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God's Will and to do it.

Pray an Our Father now for the United States of America.
 
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk

"The same Globalists who installed Biden... installed the Zelensky regime... [&] those who did not volunteer for this are Literal Human Shields for the Zelensky/Soros government... [if] Trump had survived the election coup in 2020 we would have no Ukraine war"

Above: Ukrainian President Zelensky (2nd from left) and three other men perform a homoerotic skit on Ukrainian television.    What is the Real Agenda of the corrupt Joe & Hunter Biden's Russiagate backing of the Trudeau-like Obama corrupt Ukraine Operatives in their Warmongering Posturing? "If President Trump had survived the election coup in 2020 we would have no Ukraine war (because he respects Russia’s legitimate security interests and wants to disband NATO)." - Scott Lively Constitutional lawyer Scott Lively thinks that the "same globalists who installed Biden... installed the Zelensky regime in Ukraine... [and] those who did not volunteer for this are literal human shields for the Zelensky/Soros government": The use of human shields in warfare of any kind is a horrifying satanic tactic, and, ironically, it is most effective against people who are truly humane. The tactic uses our humanity against us, because we don’t want the innocent t

"I Personally have No Doubt that Obama did in fact Orchestrate the Vatican [Pope Benedict] Coup, a[n]... Obama/Francis Partnership"

Attorney and World Net Daily (WND) contributor Scott Lively believes "that Obama did in fact orchestrate the Vatican [Pope Benedict XVI] coup, and... the Obama/Francis partnership behind the United Nation": Jesuit Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina became Pope Francis in March of 2013. I published  my first article about Pope Francis and the LGBT agenda  on August 1, 2013 when he was in the news for appearing to legitimize the concept of a “gay” identity as innate and unchangeable.  That concept is the false, anti-biblical premise of so-called “Queer Theory” (their term, not mine), a pseudo-scientific invention of “gay” political strategists, which underlies the entire LGBT political agenda. Francis infamously said in a media interview “If a person is gay and seeks the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge that person?”.   I actually defended him against the charge that this statement represented an endorsement of homosexual conduct, and gave him the benefit of t