🧵The sheer irrationality of opposing the repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment on the grounds of “democracy” and fears of “corruption” or “loss of the voice of the people” underscores just how effective a century and a half of civic propaganda has been. These narratives have been systematically drilled into the American psyche through formal education since the mid-nineteenth century. This is precisely why the resulting ignorance is bipartisan.

If people were angels, government would be unnecessary and if those who govern were angels, there would be no need for checks and balances.

The arguments advanced in opposition do nothing to refute this truth. On the contrary, they implicitly confirm it exposing a profound lack of civic understanding and a persistent inclination to abdicate civic responsibility.

America has been taught to rush headlong toward its own destruction at the hands of the very government it simultaneously claims to distrust and condemn as corrupt.

It is absolutely cultivated madness.

Please do the world a favor and stop repeating political rhetoric and read some real facts. Preferably by those who actually wrote the Constitution.

If you don’t want to dig in on your own, here is a place to start- 🧵

krisannehall.com/2019/01/06/wha…

@TenthAmendment Mercy Otis Warren writes in her Observations on the new Constitution, and on the Federal and State Conventions (1788):
 “Man is not immediately corrupted, but power without limitation, or amenability, may endanger the brightest virtue, whereas frequent return to the bar of their Constituents [frequent elections] is the strongest check against the corruptions to which men are liable, either from the intrigues of others of more subtle genius, or the propensities of their own hearts…”

Today's Point To Ponder: What is Sovereignty

Isn't it interesting the way the application of the word "sovereign" is being altered? Being vilified? Even misapplied?
Changing the societal definition of words is a tool used by tyrants throughout history to enslave the people.

The federal government is attempting (quite successfully) to stigmatize the understanding of "sovereignty" when it comes to individuals and at the same time try to convince us that the federal government is itself "sovereign."

Sovereign is defined as "autonomous, independent, self-governing; Supreme in power; possessing supreme dominion."

Are we to believe that these adjectives describe the federal government? Is the federal government autonomous, independent andself-governing? Is the federal government Supreme in power or possessing supreme dominion? Of course not!

🧵🧵🧵 Let us be reminded: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...that to secure these Rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed..."

Now consider this: “The Power not delegated to the United States by the Constitution...are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People.”

Power emanates from Rights. We did not delegate Rights to government we delegated power. Government has nothing lawfully that is not sourced from the people.

Government cannot lawfully exercise a power over you greater than YOU can lawfully exercise over your neighbor. Why?

🧵🧵🧵

All of them.
Can you show me the article, section, and clause that allows the federal government to hold membership in foreign organizations?
Because I can show you three that explicitly prohibit it.
Check out the thread below—I’ll break down the exact Articles, Sections, and Clauses that forbid it, along with why it is a direct violation of our Constitution.
@BasedMikeLee Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 – The Foreign Emoluments Clause

Violation Analysis:
•If a U.S. federal official accepts a position, membership, or advisory role in a foreign quasi-governmental organization, this could qualify as receiving an “Office” or “Emolument” from a foreign entity.
•Emoluments include salaries, gifts, benefits, or any form of compensation, even if indirect.
•Many quasi-governmental organizations (e.g., United Nations, World Economic Forum, International Monetary Fund) receive funding from foreign governments, making them extensions of those governments.

Example Scenarios of Violation:
•A U.S. Cabinet member is offered a seat on the advisory board of a foreign-backed global policy group.
•A federal agency joins an international governance body where its leaders receive privileged status or benefits.

Doge isn’t a government agency—it’s a group of informal advisors, personally chosen by the president to provide insight and counsel on key executive branch matters.

Every president has relied on trusted confidants for political, professional, and personal advice—informal advisors. These advisors often have access to sensitive, and at times, classified information.

So why the sudden outrage now?

Presidents have always surrounded themselves with informal advisors. The difference?
No one seemed to mind—until now. 🙄

I will now list for you the informal advisors for three past presidents. You tell ME who we should’ve been concerned about.

@DOGE @elonmusk President Joe Biden
•Mike Donilon: Longtime advisor and attorney with family ties to BlackRock Investment Institute.
•Valerie Biden Owens: Biden’s sister, a political strategist and recipient of a presidential pardon.
•Jon Meacham: Former Newsweek editor, now a media insider at The New York Times and Time.
•Steve Ricchetti: Lobbyist and consultant, with clients like AT&T, Eli Lilly, and major financial institutions.
•Sister Simone Campbell: Catholic nun and social justice advocate advising on faith-based initiatives.