Yes and try finding any details about that in the MSM. AgendaFree TV just went live on YouTube check it out if you want more information about the two nuclear powers who are currently going head to head.
Does not require being clever to answer your question: ("try finding ANY details about that [India/Pakistan] in the MSM"). I was simply pointing out you were wrong.
One Google search yielded many, many pages of news about India/Pakistin in the MSM. It does not take being clever, it just requires an ounce of effort on your part, one Google search - instead of perpetuating lazy myths about the MSM. You don't need to be clever, just not be lazy.
BTW, did you notice AgendaFree TV (your link above) coverage was also transmitting REUTERS information? You don;t get much more MSM than that!
The military slaughterhouse is the only reason a dollar exists. That’s the only thing American manufacturers is global slaughter and chaos vaccines GMO‘s hell on earth that’s it.
A SOUND currency does NOT need supporting if supported by precious metals, as evidenced by the strength of the Swiss Franc! In fact, for many years the Swiss Franc denominated bank accounts in Switzerland paid ZERO interest! You have the cart before the horse!
You clearly do not follow my work do you? What have I been saying since time immemorial? we need a return to a constitutional money system, CASE CLOSED.
When your followers read mindless posts like Bill's, we move on because he doesn't watch your shows enough. I do like that you defend your stance :). Keep up the ROARS!!!
Here we go!! For all my fellow antique people out there, remember that great scene from Casablanca where the crooked cop raids the casino and shouts “I am shocked, SHOCKED to find there is gambling going on here!” That will be our President in about an hour. So funny.🤣
With all due respect under reserves and without prejudices: the fiat money has to go, rainbow gold /assets back money is printed and ready to go. Write me in private and I will send you all documents proving the 2017 dept of 20 Trillions was paid in full with a 21T check plus a 300T check from HSBC , Trump was under a continuity of government since 2016 retour the power to we the people, Canada inc and all provinces inc are liquidated since 2021, and part of USA since 1867…. All lies since October 1582 , Julian to Gregorian…. Just leave the stock market and buy real assets
Interesting as they higher risk of job loss but dont lower the rates.... They will come in when its too late. We all see the writing on the wall. Trade accordingly
Please like my guy's video because he said if he gets more than 1000 likes he will stay up for Jerome Powell's speech and stream it live. He's live now. Please like and subscribe.
Why does Trump want to lower interest rates? Encourages Borrowing: Lower interest rates make borrowing cheaper, which can lead to increased spending and investment, stimulating economic growth3.
Reduces Mortgage Costs: Lower mortgage rates can reduce monthly payments, allowing households to spend more on goods and services3.
Boosts Consumer Spending: As borrowing costs decrease, consumers are more likely to spend rather than save, which can lead to higher aggregate demand3.
Increases Asset Prices: Lower interest rates make assets like housing more attractive, potentially leading to higher prices and increased wealth3.
Supports Business Investment: Lower interest rates provide businesses with cheaper financing options, encouraging them to invest in expansion and innovation
Greg, do you anticipate some kind of major event leading to a market correction so that trump can use that as the scapegoat to have the fed come in and lower interest rates similar to what happened when covid hit?
When “Limited” Isn’t Limited: The Cautionary Tale of the Connecticut Convention of 1818
by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D. May 5, 2025
When “Limited” Isn’t Limited: The Cautionary Tale of the Connecticut Convention of 1818
mscornelius/iStock/Getty Images Plus
Article audio sponsored by The John Birch Society
In 1818, the people of Connecticut were promised a “limited” convention — one that would deal narrowly and exclusively with two supposedly urgent reforms: to secure a clearer separation of powers and to restore religious liberty. That was the bait. The switch? A brand-new constitution and an entirely new form of government. This was no mere amendment process — it was a political revolution by stealth, and it serves today as a sobering warning to every American tempted by the siren song of a “limited” Article V constitutional convention.
Connecticut’s Convention
Let’s go back to the beginning. In the early 1800s, Connecticut was still operating under its colonial charter granted in 1662 by King Charles II. That charter had, through the turbulence of revolution and the birth of a new republic, survived remarkably intact and had functioned as the de facto constitution of the state for more than 150 years. By 1818, however, pressure was mounting to revise two key aspects of government structure: the consolidation of power in the General Assembly and the explicit intertwining of church and state.
These issues were real, to be sure. But they were used cynically — weaponized — as a pretext for something far more drastic: a total overhaul of the state government. And that’s precisely what happened.
Connecticut’s convention was called on the narrow premise that it would “amend” the existing charter. That’s how the people were sold on the idea. The rallying cry was reform, not revolution. But once assembled, the convention delegates went far beyond their mandate. They didn’t amend the charter — they threw it out. They didn’t limit themselves to religious liberty and the separation of powers — they rewrote the entire structure of government.
Gone was the General Assembly’s supremacy. Gone was the centuries-old charter. In their place was a brand-new constitution that fundamentally altered the distribution of power, changed how representatives were chosen, and redefined the relationship between the people and their government. In other words, the people of Connecticut were told they’d be fixing a leaky roof, but they woke up to find their entire house demolished and rebuilt without their consent.
Today’s Siren Song
And that, dear reader, is precisely what the enemies of the Constitution are hoping to pull off at the national level today.
The siren song of a “limited convention” is nothing new. The Con-Con crowd — whether wearing blue ties or red hats — loves to reassure Americans that any Article V convention would be confined to a tidy little list of topics. A balanced budget amendment. Term limits. Campaign finance reform. Take your pick. But the truth is, once that convention is convened, once those delegates are seated and that gavel strikes wood, there is no enforceable limit to what they can do.
Just ask Connecticut.
Even the U.S. Constitution itself offers no safeguard against a runaway convention. Article V says that Congress “shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments” when two-thirds of the states apply for one. But nowhere — nowhere — does it say what kind of amendments, how many, how broad, or how binding the topic limitations are. And there is certainly no mechanism in Article V, or anywhere else in the Constitution, to restrain the convention once it begins.
Some proponents claim that state legislatures can “bind” their delegates to a particular agenda. That’s a lovely fairy tale. In practice, it’s pure fantasy. Delegates to a national convention would derive their authority not from their home legislatures, but from the convention itself — the body of the people, assembled in sovereign fashion, just as the original framers did in 1787. And just like those framers in Philadelphia, modern delegates would claim — rightly or wrongly — the right to throw out the rulebook if they believe it serves the “good of the people.”
That’s exactly what happened in Connecticut. And that’s what could happen — will happen — if we open Pandora’s box and call for an Article V convention today.
1787: A Runaway Convention
Remember: the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 itself was a runaway convention. The delegates were sent to “revise the Articles of Confederation.” They weren’t supposed to write a whole new Constitution. But that’s exactly what they did. Why? Because when sovereign power is assembled, it is by definition unconstrained by prior limits.
Connecticut in 1818 followed the same path. And here’s the crucial lesson: It didn’t take deception or malice or conspiracy. It only took ambition, political opportunity, and a willing delegation. You cannot “limit” the power of men once they believe themselves entrusted with the authority to act for the people. The limits you think you’ve drawn are erased the moment the doors close and the votes begin.
Today, the push for a constitutional convention is cloaked in patriotism. Proponents declare themselves defenders of liberty, reformers of a corrupt system. They claim they want only to restore constitutional government. But their strategy would put that very Constitution on the operating table — and we have no idea who the surgeons would be, nor what scalpel they might wield.
We must not fall for the same bait-and-switch that snared Connecticut. Just as that convention ended up delivering not amendments, but a new constitution, so too would a modern Article V convention likely stray far beyond its alleged boundaries. The risk is not hypothetical. It is historical.
The Real Goal?
Would you hand a loaded weapon to a stranger? Then don’t hand the Constitution to a committee of politically appointed delegates.
There are already rumors, even among “limited convention” advocates, that the real goal is to restructure the Supreme Court, nationalize electoral procedures, or “modernize” the Bill of Rights. Imagine, for one terrifying moment, what would happen if George Soros, Bill Gates, or the Center for American Progress decided to fund a slick campaign to elect delegates sympathetic to globalism, socialism, or worse. Do you believe they wouldn’t seize the opportunity? Do you believe they’d stop at term limits?
Connecticut didn’t get what it was promised. The people were told they’d see modest reforms. They were handed a revolution. And now, two centuries later, we are being sold the same scam on a grander scale.
Let us not be duped.
We must remember the warning of James Madison, who said that “a convention is neither necessary nor safe.” We should recall the words of Thomas Jefferson: “The time to guard against corruption and tyranny is before they shall have gotten hold of us.”
And let us never forget Connecticut, 1818 — a case study in how easily a limited convention becomes an unlimited one, and how quickly a constitution can be replaced under the ruse of reform.
Meanwhile. India and Pakistan are fixing to nuclear
Seeing through the lense of imperial strategy.
https://www.spotlightnepal.com/2025/05/07/kashmir-attack-and-invisible-hand-imperial-strategy/
China Pakistan Economic Corridor!! Now we’re getting down to it!! Must be disrupted by Trump.
Yes and try finding any details about that in the MSM. AgendaFree TV just went live on YouTube check it out if you want more information about the two nuclear powers who are currently going head to head.
Who do you consider MSM? Here is reporting in the last 30 minutes. (Maybe do 1 google search before you start your propaganda spiel.
https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/live-blog/india-pakistan-live-updates-pakistan-vows-retaliation-india-strikes-ka-rcna205280
https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/india-launches-military-strikes-against-pakistan-239066181645
https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/india-pakistan-attack-kashmir-tourists-intl-hnk?Date=20250506&Profile=CNN
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fears-war-india-pakistan-exchange-231952170.html?fr=
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-reacts-indias-strikes-pakistan-2068845
I do not consider any ONE of those media outlets at all!! They are pure propaganda. https://www.youtube.com/live/4-rafXy-59g?si=WZn-Pz3y_9Jbmk9c
😂 you got me John you clever little whipper snapper!! You posted a link to NBC!!!
Does not require being clever to answer your question: ("try finding ANY details about that [India/Pakistan] in the MSM"). I was simply pointing out you were wrong.
One Google search yielded many, many pages of news about India/Pakistin in the MSM. It does not take being clever, it just requires an ounce of effort on your part, one Google search - instead of perpetuating lazy myths about the MSM. You don't need to be clever, just not be lazy.
BTW, did you notice AgendaFree TV (your link above) coverage was also transmitting REUTERS information? You don;t get much more MSM than that!
Tell me John, why do you care what I think?? What motivates you?
Will do
Greg,
BULLSHIT! Higher interest rates DON'T make a strong dollar! Balanced budgets and gold/silver backing do! You should know this!
Bill
Bill. In finance and economics there are two, and ONLY two fundamental truths. Ready? This is finance and economics 101 Bill...
1. To have a strong economy you need a strong currency.
2. To have a strong currency you need a corresponding rates of interest high enough to support the currency.
But, but, but . . . . this time it's different
isn't it?
Are you a quail hunter?
dove, quail, pheasant, grouse, partridge just about anything a shotgun will kill and dog will retreive; ducks and geese on special occassion
I knew that was you. That name isn’t that common. You know me as well. How many wildlife commissioners do you know? District 7😊
gee I know a lot of wildlife commissioners Montana or South Dakota?
The military slaughterhouse is the only reason a dollar exists. That’s the only thing American manufacturers is global slaughter and chaos vaccines GMO‘s hell on earth that’s it.
Greg,
A SOUND currency does NOT need supporting if supported by precious metals, as evidenced by the strength of the Swiss Franc! In fact, for many years the Swiss Franc denominated bank accounts in Switzerland paid ZERO interest! You have the cart before the horse!
Bill
You clearly do not follow my work do you? What have I been saying since time immemorial? we need a return to a constitutional money system, CASE CLOSED.
When your followers read mindless posts like Bill's, we move on because he doesn't watch your shows enough. I do like that you defend your stance :). Keep up the ROARS!!!
Sigh!
On that we are now agreed!
Sigh!
Is Trump trying to balance the budget?? Asking for a friend.
No, I don't think so
Tell your friend, Trump is trying to dominate the narrative. It does not matter to him, who gets hurt or humiliated in the process.
🤭👏
I don't know.
According to the Word of God. People will throw their gold in the streets
Comdeties are the best things to invest in. Survival foods and needs. Tangible things. 💟
Bessent said he will continue to raise the debt ceiling! 🤪
I don't like that!
Trump is Punch, and Powell is Judy. Clown puppet show
Here we go!! For all my fellow antique people out there, remember that great scene from Casablanca where the crooked cop raids the casino and shouts “I am shocked, SHOCKED to find there is gambling going on here!” That will be our President in about an hour. So funny.🤣
Wow. Greg knows like a psychic.
The sheep will eat it up. Most people don’t realize what’s going on. Unfortunately
With all due respect under reserves and without prejudices: the fiat money has to go, rainbow gold /assets back money is printed and ready to go. Write me in private and I will send you all documents proving the 2017 dept of 20 Trillions was paid in full with a 21T check plus a 300T check from HSBC , Trump was under a continuity of government since 2016 retour the power to we the people, Canada inc and all provinces inc are liquidated since 2021, and part of USA since 1867…. All lies since October 1582 , Julian to Gregorian…. Just leave the stock market and buy real assets
Interesting as they higher risk of job loss but dont lower the rates.... They will come in when its too late. We all see the writing on the wall. Trade accordingly
https://www.youtube.com/live/6j80_FJyRQI?si=-H4L3oOh4hATx2rs
Please like my guy's video because he said if he gets more than 1000 likes he will stay up for Jerome Powell's speech and stream it live. He's live now. Please like and subscribe.
Good cop, bad cop
The willful ignorance of this bankster puppets followers is astounding. 🤡 magician of the highest order for real…
Why does Trump want to lower interest rates? Encourages Borrowing: Lower interest rates make borrowing cheaper, which can lead to increased spending and investment, stimulating economic growth3.
Reduces Mortgage Costs: Lower mortgage rates can reduce monthly payments, allowing households to spend more on goods and services3.
Boosts Consumer Spending: As borrowing costs decrease, consumers are more likely to spend rather than save, which can lead to higher aggregate demand3.
Increases Asset Prices: Lower interest rates make assets like housing more attractive, potentially leading to higher prices and increased wealth3.
Supports Business Investment: Lower interest rates provide businesses with cheaper financing options, encouraging them to invest in expansion and innovation
Spot on Greg. This whole system is one BIG Script!!!!
Greg, do you anticipate some kind of major event leading to a market correction so that trump can use that as the scapegoat to have the fed come in and lower interest rates similar to what happened when covid hit?
Same old crap..........
When “Limited” Isn’t Limited: The Cautionary Tale of the Connecticut Convention of 1818
by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D. May 5, 2025
When “Limited” Isn’t Limited: The Cautionary Tale of the Connecticut Convention of 1818
mscornelius/iStock/Getty Images Plus
Article audio sponsored by The John Birch Society
In 1818, the people of Connecticut were promised a “limited” convention — one that would deal narrowly and exclusively with two supposedly urgent reforms: to secure a clearer separation of powers and to restore religious liberty. That was the bait. The switch? A brand-new constitution and an entirely new form of government. This was no mere amendment process — it was a political revolution by stealth, and it serves today as a sobering warning to every American tempted by the siren song of a “limited” Article V constitutional convention.
Connecticut’s Convention
Let’s go back to the beginning. In the early 1800s, Connecticut was still operating under its colonial charter granted in 1662 by King Charles II. That charter had, through the turbulence of revolution and the birth of a new republic, survived remarkably intact and had functioned as the de facto constitution of the state for more than 150 years. By 1818, however, pressure was mounting to revise two key aspects of government structure: the consolidation of power in the General Assembly and the explicit intertwining of church and state.
These issues were real, to be sure. But they were used cynically — weaponized — as a pretext for something far more drastic: a total overhaul of the state government. And that’s precisely what happened.
Connecticut’s convention was called on the narrow premise that it would “amend” the existing charter. That’s how the people were sold on the idea. The rallying cry was reform, not revolution. But once assembled, the convention delegates went far beyond their mandate. They didn’t amend the charter — they threw it out. They didn’t limit themselves to religious liberty and the separation of powers — they rewrote the entire structure of government.
Gone was the General Assembly’s supremacy. Gone was the centuries-old charter. In their place was a brand-new constitution that fundamentally altered the distribution of power, changed how representatives were chosen, and redefined the relationship between the people and their government. In other words, the people of Connecticut were told they’d be fixing a leaky roof, but they woke up to find their entire house demolished and rebuilt without their consent.
Today’s Siren Song
And that, dear reader, is precisely what the enemies of the Constitution are hoping to pull off at the national level today.
The siren song of a “limited convention” is nothing new. The Con-Con crowd — whether wearing blue ties or red hats — loves to reassure Americans that any Article V convention would be confined to a tidy little list of topics. A balanced budget amendment. Term limits. Campaign finance reform. Take your pick. But the truth is, once that convention is convened, once those delegates are seated and that gavel strikes wood, there is no enforceable limit to what they can do.
Just ask Connecticut.
Even the U.S. Constitution itself offers no safeguard against a runaway convention. Article V says that Congress “shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments” when two-thirds of the states apply for one. But nowhere — nowhere — does it say what kind of amendments, how many, how broad, or how binding the topic limitations are. And there is certainly no mechanism in Article V, or anywhere else in the Constitution, to restrain the convention once it begins.
Some proponents claim that state legislatures can “bind” their delegates to a particular agenda. That’s a lovely fairy tale. In practice, it’s pure fantasy. Delegates to a national convention would derive their authority not from their home legislatures, but from the convention itself — the body of the people, assembled in sovereign fashion, just as the original framers did in 1787. And just like those framers in Philadelphia, modern delegates would claim — rightly or wrongly — the right to throw out the rulebook if they believe it serves the “good of the people.”
That’s exactly what happened in Connecticut. And that’s what could happen — will happen — if we open Pandora’s box and call for an Article V convention today.
1787: A Runaway Convention
Remember: the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 itself was a runaway convention. The delegates were sent to “revise the Articles of Confederation.” They weren’t supposed to write a whole new Constitution. But that’s exactly what they did. Why? Because when sovereign power is assembled, it is by definition unconstrained by prior limits.
Connecticut in 1818 followed the same path. And here’s the crucial lesson: It didn’t take deception or malice or conspiracy. It only took ambition, political opportunity, and a willing delegation. You cannot “limit” the power of men once they believe themselves entrusted with the authority to act for the people. The limits you think you’ve drawn are erased the moment the doors close and the votes begin.
Today, the push for a constitutional convention is cloaked in patriotism. Proponents declare themselves defenders of liberty, reformers of a corrupt system. They claim they want only to restore constitutional government. But their strategy would put that very Constitution on the operating table — and we have no idea who the surgeons would be, nor what scalpel they might wield.
We must not fall for the same bait-and-switch that snared Connecticut. Just as that convention ended up delivering not amendments, but a new constitution, so too would a modern Article V convention likely stray far beyond its alleged boundaries. The risk is not hypothetical. It is historical.
The Real Goal?
Would you hand a loaded weapon to a stranger? Then don’t hand the Constitution to a committee of politically appointed delegates.
There are already rumors, even among “limited convention” advocates, that the real goal is to restructure the Supreme Court, nationalize electoral procedures, or “modernize” the Bill of Rights. Imagine, for one terrifying moment, what would happen if George Soros, Bill Gates, or the Center for American Progress decided to fund a slick campaign to elect delegates sympathetic to globalism, socialism, or worse. Do you believe they wouldn’t seize the opportunity? Do you believe they’d stop at term limits?
Connecticut didn’t get what it was promised. The people were told they’d see modest reforms. They were handed a revolution. And now, two centuries later, we are being sold the same scam on a grander scale.
Let us not be duped.
We must remember the warning of James Madison, who said that “a convention is neither necessary nor safe.” We should recall the words of Thomas Jefferson: “The time to guard against corruption and tyranny is before they shall have gotten hold of us.”
And let us never forget Connecticut, 1818 — a case study in how easily a limited convention becomes an unlimited one, and how quickly a constitution can be replaced under the ruse of reform.