‘We are Drifting Towards Greatest Constitutional Crisis Since Civil War’ – Newt Gingrich

[mystery-ak]

August 14, 2023
‘We are Drifting Towards Greatest Constitutional Crisis Since Civil War’ – Newt Gingrich

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) warned tonight that the indictments against President Trump is putting the nation on a path towards a constitutional crisis.

“We are drifting towards the greatest constitutional crisis since the 1850’s and the rise of secession and civil war,” he said on Fox News. “I don’t mean that as hyperbole.”

Gingrich’s remarks came as a Georgia grand jury handed down 10 indictments in the Trump Georgia case.

“What you are seeing across the country is a desperate, last ditch effort by a corrupt machine to destroy their most dangerous opponent in a way that not only breaks the constitution, destroys the rule of law and establishes a moment of bitterness which I think will last for a generation or more,” he said.

Gingrich said Americans should be incredibly alarmed and downright scared of how the Obama machine has weaponized the judicial system.

“This is going to be a horrendous period,” he predicted. “The people who want to control America and dictate to the rest of us will break any law, lie about any topic and manipulate the system any way they can and that includes a lot of the elite news media.”

more
https://www.toddstarnes.com/crime/we-are-drifting-towards-greatest-constitutional-crisis-since-civil-war-newt-gingrich/

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Been saying the same thing.

[goatprairie]

Gingrich is another person I used to respect who's gone down into the abyss like Rudy Giuliani with his insipid Trump-rear end kissing.
Yeah, the Dems don't care much about the constitution.
But the nutty stunts Trump has pulled after he lost to Biden put wind in their, the Dems, sails.
Let's get behind someone who doesn't invite these kinds of politically-caused actions. DeSantis or somebody other than Trump.

[Wingnut]

The conservative states need to rise up again and fight against the norths second war of aggression.

[Fishrrman]

Wingnut throws a wrench with:
"The conservative states need to rise up again and fight against the norths second war of aggression."

The Colonists faced this in the 1770's. Their answer was the First, and then a Second Continental Congress.

We have come to that point again, so once more I'll ask:
Is it time yet for that "New Heartland Continental Congress" ???

[jmyrlefuller]

Drifting towards? Dude, we've been in the midst of it for three and a half years in some form or another. This would've never happened without emergency powers.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Wingnut throws a wrench with:
"The conservative states need to rise up again and fight against the norths second war of aggression."

The Colonists faced this in the 1770's. Their answer was the First, and then a Second Continental Congress.

We have come to that point again, so once more I'll ask:
Is it time yet for that "New Heartland Continental Congress" ???

The bolded is the first sticking point, because the Revolution happened when the colonies had literally no vote as to how they were governed.

Whining about the 2020 election aside, Republicans control the House of Representatives.  That alone proves we are not near 1775 levels of disenfranchisement.

On top of that..exactly how would you visualize this revolution happening, in concrete terms?  People hopping in their pickups and conquering D.C., or what?

[jmyrlefuller]

The bolded is the first sticking point, because the Revolution happened when the colonies had literally no vote as to how they were governed.

Whining about the 2020 election aside, Republicans control the House of Representatives.  That alone proves we are not near 1775 levels of disenfranchisement.

On top of that..exactly how would you visualize this revolution happening, in concrete terms?  People hopping in their pickups and conquering D.C., or what?

I've addressed his white-nationalist fantasy in the past. There's also the issue that the American Revolution happened when the Crown was thousands of miles away with no air travel nor timely transcontinental communication links. It literally took months for George III to send command to his generals on the continent. We won the Revolution only because we had the home field advantage.

Only once—World War II—have we won a war on the enemy's turf. We failed to secure Canada in the War of 1812. The South failed to establish independence in the Civil War. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan all have totalitarian regimes still intact. The Soviet rump state is still asserting its power in Ukraine.

And this guy expects to assert a "heartland continental congress" when DC can order commands within seconds? The right can't even keep a social media outlet up and running, let alone a war for independence.

[Smokin Joe]

I've addressed his white-nationalist fantasy in the past. There's also the issue that the American Revolution happened when the Crown was thousands of miles away with no air travel nor timely transcontinental communication links. It literally took months for George III to send command to his generals on the continent. We won the Revolution only because we had the home field advantage.

Only once—World War II—have we won a war on the enemy's turf. We failed to secure Canada in the War of 1812. The South failed to establish independence in the Civil War. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan all have totalitarian regimes still intact. The Soviet rump state is still asserting its power in Ukraine.

And this guy expects to assert a "heartland continental congress" when DC can order commands within seconds? The right can't even keep a social media outlet up and running, let alone a war for independence.

You make a valid point. As long as DC can order and effectively mobilize in seconds they will likely prevail. As long as they have the fuel and the resources to do so. Supply chains can be a bitch, though. Jus' sayin'.

[Wingnut]

The bolded is the first sticking point, because the Revolution happened when the colonies had literally no vote as to how they were governed.

Whining about the 2020 election aside, Republicans control the House of Representatives.  That alone proves we are not near 1775 levels of disenfranchisement.

On top of that..exactly how would you visualize this revolution happening, in concrete terms?  People hopping in their pickups and conquering D.C., or what?

I would model it after the French resistance.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I've addressed his white-nationalist fantasy in the past. There's also the issue that the American Revolution happened when the Crown was thousands of miles away with no air travel nor timely transcontinental communication links. It literally took months for George III to send command to his generals on the continent. We won the Revolution only because we had the home field advantage.

Only once—World War II—have we won a war on the enemy's turf. We failed to secure Canada in the War of 1812. The South failed to establish independence in the Civil War. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan all have totalitarian regimes still intact. The Soviet rump state is still asserting its power in Ukraine.

And this guy expects to assert a "heartland continental congress" when DC can order commands within seconds? The right can't even keep a social media outlet up and running, let alone a war for independence.

The American Revolution was not some kind of spontaneous, mass rebellion with farmers grabbing pitchforks and marching on their colonial capital.  In a sense, it was a very top down revolution, with formal votes being held by elected representatives, calls for troops being issued by colonial legislatures, etc..  It was well thought out, considered, and planned.

What state legislatures, right now, would vote to actually leave the U.S.?  And if any did, how do you suppose that decision would be received by all the various people within that state?

I just don't see how anyone believes that is even the tiniest bit likely to happen.

[corbe]

   They shoulda never changed the name from the Department of War, they lost their focus @jmyrlefuller

[libertybele]

You make a valid point. As long as DC can order and effectively mobilize in seconds they will likely prevail. As long as they have the fuel and the resources to do so. Supply chains can be a bitch, though. Jus' sayin'.

Agreed.

[jmyrlefuller]

The American Revolution was not some kind of spontaneous, mass rebellion with farmers grabbing pitchforks and marching on their colonial capital.  In a sense, it was a very top down revolution, with formal votes being held by elected representatives, calls for troops being issued by colonial legislatures, etc..  It was well thought out, considered, and planned.

What state legislatures, right now, would vote to actually leave the U.S.?  And if any did, how do you suppose that decision would be received by all the various people within that state?

I just don't see how anyone believes that is even the tiniest bit likely to happen.

Exactly, especially with so much of society dominated by government. Pretty much any state except Texas that tried to secede could immediately get cut off from the power grid. And with no electricity, the rebellion would not last more than a few days.

[Smokin Joe]

Exactly, especially with so much of society dominated by government. Pretty much any state except Texas that tried to secede could immediately get cut off from the power grid. And with no electricity, the rebellion would not last more than a few days.

Theoretically. My state exports half of the electricity we produce. Cutting us off might be difficult. There are other states that are way behind in that balance, and if unable to import power would have major issues.

Specific regions of liberal activity would self-destruct if they had an extended blackout, especially this time of year (No major city has a graceful power outage in August).

But that is just one part of the equation. Food, fuel, etc. are often produced far from their points of consumption. If the Red States went 'Galt', the blue States would mostly be screwed.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I would model it after the French resistance.

Which accomplished nothing of note until the massive allied armies invaded.  Without that hope, it's pointless.  You'd just be targeting ordinary schmoes rather than anyone with real power, and they'dost definitely hunt down the American Maquis much more easily than the Germans did.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Theoretically. My state exports half of the electricity we produce. Cutting us off might be difficult. There are other states that are way behind in that balance, and if unable to import power would have major issues.

Specific regions of liberal activity would self-destruct if they had an extended blackout, especially this time of year (No major city has a graceful power outage in August).

But that is just one part of the equation. Food, fuel, etc. are often produced far from their points of consumption. If the Red States went 'Galt', the blue States would mostly be screwed.

But they won't.  There is nowhere near the support in the red states necessary for that to happen.

Think of all the businesses - and people - that have their money in banks that would essentially vanish when. The feds zap it all.  Most people simply wouldn't want the headaches that would come with it until things got much worse than they are.

[Smokin Joe]

But they won't.  There is nowhere near the support in the red states necessary for that to happen.

Think of all the businesses - and people - that have their money in banks that would essentially vanish when. The feds zap it all.  Most people simply wouldn't want the headaches that would come with it until things got much worse than they are.

Well, we are talking theoretically, here.

As for money in banks that aren't local, I, personally am not so inclined.
Too damned much of my life is subject to the whims of people 2000 miles away, now, so I avoid the big banks for that reason, as much as  possible. I don't bank online, nor with my phone, and resist doing otherwise.

As long as we are comparing to 1776, though, how heavily were the colonists vested in banks offshore? There was a dreadful shortage of Specie, (for instance, in MD and elsewhere tobacco was an accepted form of payment for taxes), coinage was fairly rare, and the various colonies either used British coin, Made their own coins, or even printed their own paper money.
In this day and age, investing in physical silver or gold or other commodities of value (semi-precious metal, for instance) remain easy options to preserve wealth, if not increase it.
"Junk silver" (circulated 90% silver coins) are already monetized, and could be substituted as a medium of exchange for small purchases at melt value or slightly adjusted. Melt value of a 90% silver US dime is $1.65, for instance, a quarter $4.13, a Half dollar at $8.23,  a Silver Dollar, $17.68, and a full ounce of silver (.999) at $22.86. That could come back in style if enough people bought some to put away.
This is hypothetical, but don't think those in 1776 hadn't planned for the future, and taken steps to ensure their as best as possible. There are other possible items of exchange, but that is one whose purity and weight is pretty well already established. Especially with banking getting wrapped up in ESG and the possibility of social scores, "cashless society", etc. it might be prudent to have something to work with should you pop up as one of those flyover country hooligans that should be de-funded.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Well, we are talking theoretically, here.

As for money in banks that aren't local, I, personally am not so inclined.
Too damned much of my life is subject to the whims of people 2000 miles away, now, so I avoid the big banks for that reason, as much as  possible. I don't bank online, nor with my phone, and resist doing otherwise.

The vast majority of people don't do that, though.

Things will have to get much worse before anything approaching a majority will be willing to take that kind of step.

Personally, I think a better route is for the GOP to adopt sort of a "federalism on steroids" approach for the country as a whole.  Sell the idea to leftists who don't want anything to do with us, and sell it to conservatives who want nothing to do with them.  Much more state autonomy. Let the blue states outlaw guns, fund abortion, etc..  We get rid of government welfare, tons of regulation, etc..

No more fighting/arguing, or at least a lot less.

[Smokin Joe]

The vast majority of people don't do that, though.

Things will have to get much worse before anything approaching a majority will be willing to take that kind of step.

Personally, I think a better route is for the GOP to adopt sort of a "federalism on steroids" approach for the country as a whole.  Sell the idea to leftists who don't want anything to do with us, and sell it to conservatives who want nothing to do with them.  Much more state autonomy. Let the blue states outlaw guns, fund abortion, etc..  We get rid of government welfare, tons of regulation, etc..

No more fighting/arguing, or at least a lot less.

Considering the original model had a Federated union of several states, each with their own executive, legislature, a past of issuing their own coinage but agreeing to use a standard coin, treasurers, armies ("Militias"), and the like, that would be a great step in the right direction. We were not supposed to have a "national" government, but a Federal Republic, limited in its scope and powers by the Constitution, and definitely not the overreaching leviathan we have today. So much power has been usurped by the Federal Government since the passage of the 17th Amendment, it isn't funny, because with the change in the election of the Senate, the States effectively lost their representation in Congress as governmental entities, and the Senate became another House of Representatives, just with different rules and powers.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Considering the original model had a Federated union of several states, each with their own executive, legislature, a past of issuing their own coinage but agreeing to use a standard coin, treasurers, armies ("Militias"), and the like, that would be a great step in the right direction. We were not supposed to have a "national" government, but a Federal Republic, limited in its scope and powers by the Constitution, and definitely not the overreaching leviathan we have today. So much power has been usurped by the Federal Government since the passage of the 17th Amendment, it isn't funny, because with the change in the election of the Senate, the States effectively lost their representation in Congress as governmental entities, and the Senate became another House of Representatives, just with different rules and powers.

It's unlikely, but it is a hell of a lot more palatable than a real civil war.

The biggest hurdle is fiscal.   The vast majority of benefits/taxes would be state-based, which means they couldn't be financed by deficit spending.   That's the real reason why Dems have always opposed turning federal programs over to the states.

[Smokin Joe]

It's unlikely, but it is a hell of a lot more palatable than a real civil war.

The biggest hurdle is fiscal.   The vast majority of benefits/taxes would be state-based, which means they couldn't be financed by deficit spending.   That's the real reason why Dems have always opposed turning federal programs over to the states.

Considering a lot of those federal programs are Democrat vote buys anyway, no wonder.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Only the people can solve this current predicament we find ourselves in.

Even if a section of states breaks off, you'll still have liberal areas (cities) or conservative areas (rural areas) breaking off within those states and so on and so forth. A total balkanization of country. Won't that be fun?

[Fishrrman]

Weird wrote:
"...you'll still have liberal areas (cities) or conservative areas (rural areas) breaking off within those states and so on and so forth. A total balkanization of country. Won't that be fun?"

Problems like that will be resolved.
Either by themselves, or by "migrations".
Just as we are seeing many migrate out of the blue states now.

[Free Vulcan]

It will take us and the states to thwart their efforts as much as possible till in desperation the FedGov tries to 'suspend' the Constitution, at which point they are no longer a legit govt that anyone has to follow.