Is the solution to federal tyranny a Con Con?

Rocco J. Piserchia

There are many reasons to reject all calls for an Article 5 amendments convention or a Constitutional Convention (Con Con).  I’ll list four arguments.

1.) There is no way to limit the scope of an Article 5 convention once it begins.  Anyone who claims otherwise is mistaken.  The language of Article 5 does not include any limitations to the number and type of amendments that could be adopted,

“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress…”

2.) Consider the implications of how the original federal Constitution was formed – it was illegally adopted.  The Philadelphia meetings that drafted the Constitution were only authorized by Congress to amend the Articles of Confederation but they produced a completely new compact.  “That it be recommended to the States composing the Union that a convention of representatives from the said States respectively be held at on for the purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the United States of America and reporting to the United States in Congress assembled and to the States respectively such alterations and amendments of the said Articles of Confederation as the representatives met in such convention shall judge proper and necessary to render them adequate to the preservation and support of the Union “

The Articles of Confederation also established a perpetual union that could only be dissolved by Congress and the unanimous consent of all the states that ratified it.  Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation reads, “…And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State…”  Only 9 states were required to ratify the Constitution while all 13 were required to abolish the Articles of Confederation.  Furthermore Congress was required to first alter the Articles of Confederation followed by the ratification of 13 states but Congress never consented. “Congress unanimously left the decision to the states, without any recommendation for or against adoption.”

So if an Article 5 convention is convened we should expect the very real possibility that the Constitution would be replaced by a completely different compact.

3.)  It’s beyond unrealistic to think that the current occupants of Congress as well as the current occupants of the 50 state legislatures would consciously choose to limit the power of the federal government and expand the power of the state governments.  Today we have the 10th Amendment, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” However no state yet has nullified and interposed against the federal government to completely ban the PPACA  (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act a.k.a. Obamacare).  If the states refuse to use the Constitutional authority they now have under the 10th Amendment why should they be expected to utilize any new amendments?

4.) The federal government today does not even remotely reflect the federal government as expressed in the Constitution.  In other words the vast majority of all three branches of the federal government refuse to obey the Constitution in its current form – the federal government is no longer legitimate.The President is a de facto dictator.  Congress continually passes laws outside the bounds of the limited delegated powers of Article 1 section 8.  And the Supreme Court as well as federal courts violate their jurisdiction beyond those areas specified in the Constitution. Logic dictates that there is no reason to think that merely changing the Constitution will result in corrupt people obeying it.  The President, the vast majority of those in Congress, the Supreme Court Justices and federal court judges are currently oath breakers –they do not honor their oath to defend the Constitution.  Changing the Compact will not mystically result in their Constitutional repentance.

It’s very disturbing to see how many prominent people are advocating that a Constitutional convention should be held.  Mark Levin supports it and is actively promoting this idea with his book The Liberty AmendmentsLevin has no Constitutional credibility since he completely rejects the validity of the states now using the 10th Amendment to nullify and interpose against federal laws that are not Constitutional.

Senator Tom Coburn has called for a Con Con.

Senator Rand Paul wants to amend the Constitution.

Constitutional historian Kevin Gutzman supports a Con Con. “I finally conceded, if the gigantic inertial force of 200 years of jurisprudential and political tradition could be overcome, we might actually use a remedy the Founders gave us: Article V. Via Article V of the Constitution, we could perform an end-run around the legal establishment and the self-serving Washington elite and restore decentralized, republican government in America…Thus, on April 9, 2010, Randy Barnett, the late Tony Blankley, Bruce Fein, and I participated in an Article V Amending Convention Town Hall on The Mike Church Show. (Here’s the transcript.) In the course of that two-hour event, the leading libertarian legal academic of his generation, a prominent Republican political operative, a one-time top official in the Reagan justice department, and Your Humble Historian touched on every question one could have about the unused portion of Article V of the Constitution.”

Robert Natelson who authored the book The Original Constitution supports a Con Con which he and other advocates now insist on calling an Article 5 convention.

I asked Tom Woods if he supported Mark’s Levin’s call for a convention to amend the US Constitution.  Surprisingly Tom Woods was open to holding a Constitutional Convention. Considering his knowledge of US history  and the Constitution I expected him to oppose a Con Con.

I interviewed Mike Church when he was at Nullify Now in Raleigh on 10/19/13.  I asked him if he supported the calls for a Constitutional Convention (Con Con) since Mark Levin and others were supporting the call for a Con Con.  Unfortunately he did support it even though he admitted that an Article 5 convention could not be limited in its scope, i.e., there would be no limitations to what an Article 5 convention could address.

Mike Maharrey, Communications Director of the Tenth Amendment Center, was interviewed at Nullify Now in Raleigh NC on 10/19/13.  I asked him if he supported the call for a Constitutional Convention (Con Con) which is being advocated by Mark Levin, among others.  Mike said he was neutral about the idea of amending the Constitution but he expressed healthy skepticism as to the potential benefits of amending the Constitution when the Constitution in its current form is ignored by the federal government.

The Kennedy Assassination 50 Years Later

Paul Craig Roberts


November 22, 2013, is the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The true story of JFK’s murder has never been officially admitted, although the conclusion that JFK was murdered by a plot involving the Secret Service, the CIA, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff has been well established by years of research, such as that provided by James W. Douglass in his book, JFK And The Unspeakable, published by Simon & Schuster in 2008. Ignore Douglass’ interest in the Trappist monk Thomas Merton and Merton’s prediction and focus on the heavily documented research that Douglass provides.


Or just turn to the contemporary films, taken by tourists watching JFK’s motorcade that are available on YouTube, which show clearly the Secret Service pulled from President Kennedy’s limo just prior to his assassination, and the Zapruder film that shows the killing shot to have come from President Kennedy’s right front, blowing off the back of his head, not from the rear as postulated in the Warren Commission Report, which would have pushed his head forward, not rearward.


I am not going to write about the assassination to the extent that the massive information permits. Those who want to know already know. Those who cannot face the music will never be able to confront the facts regardless of what I or anyone else writes or reveals.


To briefly review, the facts are conclusive that JFK was on terrible terms with the CIA and the Joint Chiefs. He had refused to support the CIA organized Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. He had rejected the Joint Chiefs’ “Operation Northwoods,” a plan to commit real and faked acts of violence against Americans, blame Castro and use the false flag events to bring regime change to Cuba. He had rejected the Joint Chiefs case that the Soviet Union should be attacked while the US held the advantage and before the Soviets could develop delivery systems for nuclear weapons. He had indicated that after his reelection he was going to pull US troops out of Vietnam and that he was going to break the CIA into a thousand pieces. He had aroused suspicion by working behind the scenes with Khrushchev to defuse the Cuban Missile Crisis, leading to claims that he was “soft on communism.” The CIA and Joint Chiefs’ belief that JFK was an unreliable ally in the war against communism spread into the Secret Service.


It has been established that the original autopsy of JFK’s fatal head wound was discarded and a faked one substituted in order to support the official story that Oswald shot JFK from behind. FBI director J. Edgar Hoover and President Johnson knew that Oswald was the CIA’s patsy, but they also understood, as did members of the Warren Commission, that to let the true story out would cause Americans to lose confidence in their own government at the height of the Cold War.


Robert Kennedy knew what had happened. He was on his way to being elected president and to holding the plotters accountable for the murder of his brother when the CIA assassinated him. A distinguished journalist, who was standing behind Robert Kennedy at the time of his assassination, told me that the killing shots came from behind past his ear. He submitted his report to the FBI and was never contacted.


Acoustic experts have conclusively demonstrated that more shots were fired than can be accounted for by Sirhan Sirhan’s pistol and that the sounds indicate two different calibers of firearms.


I never cease to be amazed by the gullibility of Americans, who know nothing about either event, but who confidently dismiss the factual evidence provided by experts and historians on the basis of their naive belief that “the government wouldn’t lie about such important events” or “someone would have talked.” What good would it do if someone talked when the gullible won’t believe hard evidence?


Secret Service pulled from JFK’s limo


Zapruder film


James W. Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable, Simon & Schuster, 2008


Operation Northwoods:

Sheriff: Child was handcuffed regularly

by DIANA RUGG / NBC Charlotte

Bio | Email | Follow: @DianaRuggwcnc

Posted on November 17, 2013 at 10:16 PM

MONROE, N.C. — Union County sheriff’s investigators and animal control officers returned to the home Sunday where an 11-year-old boy had been found shivering and handcuffed to a porch rail with a dead chicken around his neck Friday morning.

click here to see photos

They spent several hours working on the property, including feeding and caring for the many animals left there, and even disposing of the chicken that had been left on a barrel once it was removed from the child’s neck.

Dozens of chickens, turkeys, geese, and even a peahen roamed the property among junked cars, bicycles, and appliances.  Deputies fed two llamas and a horse that shared a pen behind the house.     

Sheriff Eddie Cathey said two dogs had already been removed.

Wanda Sue Larson, a DSS supervisor, and Dorian Lee Harper, an emergency room nurse at CMC-Union, lived at the house with their four adopted children and the foster child the animal control officer found on the porch.

Both Larson and Harper are charged with child abuse, false imprisonment, and animal cruelty.  They’re in the Union County jail under more than a million dollars combined bond.

“As bad as you think that house was on the outside, that’s probably the cleanest part of that place,” said Sheriff Eddie Cathey Sunday.

He said the smell inside the house took his breath away, where five children lived among dogs and feces.

The smell still lingered in the yard Sunday.

“There’s no reason, no thinking of a common sense person would think anyone living in those condition could adopt — not only a child –we wouldn’t let them adopt an animal out of our animal shelter,” said Cathey.

Sheriff Cathey said all five children in the home slept on the floor in a single bedroom, where the foster child was regularly handcuffed to a piece of railroad to keep him from running away.

Neighbors couldn’t hide their disgust as more details of the children’s conditions were revealed Sunday.

“Ugh,” said Jenny Wallace, who lives across the street.  “I was devastated, that this type of thing is going on in this neighborhood.”

Wallace said the family was reclusive, and she rarely saw the children.  But Friday morning, she met one.

“I saw a little boy come up to my house and knock on my door and ask me did I see his pig,” said Wallace.  “He didn’t look like he’d been abused or mistreated in any way.”

That missing pig is what led another neighbor to call animal control, bringing out the officer who found the handcuffed child.

“Certainly our deputy was shocked,” said Cathey.  “And when we talked to him and realized what had happened, we were very proud that he went the extra step in just a small animal case that he was investigating and discovered this child sitting there on the porch — just pitiful.”

Larson and Harper have first appearances scheduled in Union County court on Monday.


Foster care is un-American

CPS Warrior Nancy Schaefer Gunned Down

Congress in 1979: “Probable conspiracy” behind JFK Assassination

In the wake of Watergate and President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974, a “reform” Congress undertook investigations of the FBI, CIA, and other intelligence agencies–the Church Committee published 14 reports containing its findings. With the public airing of the Zapruder home movie of the JFK assassination showing Kennedy reacting to an apparent shot from the front, there were calls for reinvestigation of this and other political assassinations of the 1960s.

In 1976, the House Select Committee on Assassinations undertook reinvestigations of the murders of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. In 1979, a single Report and twelve volumes of appendices on each assassination were published by the Congress. In the JFK case, the HSCA found that there was a “probable conspiracy,” though it was unable to determine the nature of that conspiracy or its other participants (besides Oswald). This finding was based in part on acoustics evidence from a tape purported to record the shots, but was also based on other evidence including an investigation of Ruby’s underworld connections. The acoustics evidence was disputed by a panel of scientists, but that “debunking” has itself come under attack recently.

The massive internal files of the HSCA were unsealed in the wake of the 1992 JFK Assassination Records Collection Act. Still being digested by researchers, they have shed more light on the assassination itself and also on the conduct of the HSCA’s investigation…


Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives

Summary of Findings and Recommendations

I. Findings of the Select Committee on Assassinations in the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Tex., November 22, 1963

A.   Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

1.     President Kennedy was struck by two rifle shots fired from behind him.

2.     The shots that struck President Kennedy from behind him were fired from the sixth floor window of the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository building.

3.     Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle that was used to fire the shots from the sixth floor window of the southeast comer of the Texas School Book Depository building.

4.     Lee Harvey Oswald, shortly before the assassination, had access to and was present on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository building.

5.     Lee Harvey Oswald’s other actions tend to support the conclusion that he assassinated President Kennedy.

B.    Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.

C.   The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy…


Top Generals Reveal Obama’s Secret High Level Military Purge

Originally posted November 1st, 2013
Updated 11/01/2013 at 2:58 pm

In Obama’s America, the military must forsake their constitutional oath in favor of blind allegiance to their new commander. And whether it’s top nuke commanders being removed for failing to play ball with the global elite, or just silencing potential whistleblowers, top military generals are now speaking out about the ‘mass purge’ within the United States military.

obama-us-army-purgeOne such general, a recipient of the Medal of Honor, has now gone on record in speaking with news organization WND about the mass culling of high level military officers on behalf of the Obama administration. Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady says that the attack on high level military personnel is so great that it has now obliterated the morale of troops at large, but is more importantly centered in terminating any high level individual that will not go along with the plan.

“There is no doubt he (Obama) is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him,” the retired general told WND.

General Brady’s admission comes just after two of the top nuclear commanders in the United States were terminated and suspended amid the high level military intelligence we released surrounding the secret transfer of nuclear weapons from a Texas Airforce base to South Carolina. And while the terminations were originally reported on by the Associated Press, who has been covering the issue in depth and even hinting towards our coverage of the missing nuke within their reports, it was revealed by the agency that the terminations and suspensions were actually found out through leaked emails.

In other words, the mass purge of military officials was never truly intended to meet the public eye. But even in the face of government secrecy surrounding the issue, numerous news organizations and media figures have now come out and highlighted the purge of top nuke commanders and others. From Michael Savage launching an investigation into the missing nuke issue and calling for answers, to WND questioning officials over the military intelligence.

Overall, the new media has forced this issue into the spotlight, reaching millions with the powerful information that has been confirmed time and time again by scenarios like Senator Lindsey Graham’s same day speech regarding a nuclear strike on the exact destination of the nuclear warheads. Meanwhile, the establishment has been busy in attempting to eliminate high level military officers who will not blindly follow commander Obama on his every unconstitutional demand.

Share Button

Anthony Gucciardi

About the Author ()

Google Plus Profile Anthony Gucciardi is the creator of Storyleak, accomplished writer, producer, and seeker of truth. His articles have been read by millions worldwide and are routinely featured on major alternative news websites like Drudge Report, Infowars, NaturalNews, G Edward Griffin’s Reality Zone, and many others. He is also a founding member of the third largest alternative health site in the world,


9 Generals Fired, 2 Military Leaders Suspended

Posted by Sonya Sandage

  • October 23, 2013

Nine commanding Generals have been fired, and two other leaders are on suspension, in a historic military shake up.

In our story from last week, we covered the historic occurrence of two top-ranking nuclear chief’s fired.

Today The Blaze is reporting from their sources for the reasons why the changes are happening.

The timing comes as the five branches of the U.S. armed forces are reducing staff due to budget cuts, and as U.S. troops are expected to withdraw from Afghanistan next year.

“I think they’re using the opportunity of the shrinkage of the military to get rid of people that don’t agree with them or not tow
the party line. Remember, as (former White House chief of staff) Rahm Emanuel said, never waste a crisis,” a senior retired general told
TheBlaze on the condition of anonymity because he still provide services to the government and fears possible retribution.

“Even as a retired general, it’s still possible for the administration to make life miserable for us. If we’re working with the government or
have contracts, they can just rip that out from under us,” he said.

Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, an outspoken critic of the Obama administration, said the White House fails to take action or
investigate its own, but finds it easy to fire military commanders “who have given their lives for their country.”

“Obama will not purge a civilian or political appointee because they have bought into Obama’s ideology,” Vallely said. “The White House protects their own. That’s why they stalled on the investigation into fast and furious, Benghazi and Obamacare. He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

Brigadier General Bryan Roberts

Brigadier General Bryan Roberts

Brig Gen Bryan Wampler & CS Maj Don B Jordan

Brig Gen Bryan Wampler
& CS Maj Don B Jordan

Commander General Carter F. Ham

General Carter F. Ham

Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette

Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette

Major General Ralph Baker

Major General Ralph Baker

Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant

Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant

Major General C.M.M. Gurganus

Major General C.M.M. Gurganus

Lt. General David H. Huntoon, Jr

Lt. General David H. Huntoon, Jr