Before I start I want to send a shout-out to Monica Lewinsky who was one of my favorite Trivial Pursuit questions back in the late 90’s before people burned the game in protest that more Presidential mistresses were not used as questions.
I’m glad she is doing well.
Monica Lewinsky, of course, is famous for a bit of an infamous reason, one which I do not feel the need to go over here. However, if you want the cliff notes version because you were born after 9/11, you can check this out here and get a much fuller grasp of her experiences and notoriety.
The lady who almost made the word “intern” a bad word has come out with six suggestions that she believes are pure common sense to amend the Constitution of the United States.
Monica Lewinsky penned on op-ed Monday calling for a series of constitutional amendments, including age limits for elected officials and a ban on presidential self-pardons.
In a piece in Vanity Fair, Lewinsky offered her vision for a more robust democracy via six new amendments: no presidential self-pardons, mandatory background checks for presidents, no suspensions of the U.S. Constitution, a retirement age for elected officials, elimination of the Electoral College and codification of a woman’s right to an abortion.
Lewinsky, who is a contributing writer at Vanity Fair, jotted her thoughts down on amending our founding document.
After reading her suggestions here in-depth, I decided that America’s favorite foil to Hillary Clinton had done a sub-par job of making the case of why her suggestions were warranted of the states passing them. That or, God forbid, a Constitutional Convention was to be held where people like Lewinsky or Puck from the Real World and his snot rockets could be selected as delegates based on some pop culture relevancy.
Although, I hope Puck is doing as well as Monica.
Her first suggestion is barring the President from pardoning themselves. As she gleefully writes.
For the head of the executive branch, there should not be a “get out of jail free” card. In other words, presidents should not be able to pardon themselves. They should not be able to wield the most power of anyone in our country and not be held responsible for illegal or unconstitutional actions while wielding that power
The Presidential power to pardon has been one of the most debated issues in the modern era since Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon after his resignation in 1974. Rumors swirled that it was a back-door deal done before Nixon appointed Ford to replace disgraced Vice President Spiro Agnew who had also resigned.
This power is also generally debated and discussed when a President is about to leave office and pardon a slew of individuals and naturally questions arise of why certain people got the slate wiped clean or a sentence commuted. Lewinsky’s objective here is aiming at Trump on this if (OH NO) he were to win in 2024. In her worldview, that could be worse than a Taylor Swift concert being canceled.
Of course, trying to look like the well-balanced, one-time civil servant she was, she adds that the President should not be able to pardon their kin. This is a concession by her that if President Joe Biden gets a crack at excusing Hunter and his laptop boondoggle with a pardon, it should go before a bi-partisan congressional committee.
That, of course, defeats the whole point of why the Founders wanted one individual (preferably a decent moral human being, like the two who preceded and followed Monica’s one-time boss) to hold the power of taking politics out of pardoning offenses. Yet, I get it. No President has ever pardoned themselves, but it makes for a great fictional West Wing episode so let’s monkey with that being it isn’t broke so let’s break it.
Her second suggestion is to make sure there is an amendment to make sure that anyone who runs for (federal) office goes through a background check.
Do you know who doesn’t have to go through the same (or an even more vigorous) process? The president of the United States. In fact, neither does the vice president, nor Supreme Court justices, nor even members of Congress. As president (or as any elected official) you are basically deemed inherently trustworthy by the act of being elected by the American people. (This is some twisted shit.) In my view, you should not be able to have your name on any presidential or US congressional ballot if you can’t pass a rigorous security clearance.
This one took me by surprise.
I’m almost certain that background checks are done on any elected officials on the federal side who need security access to the top secret variety of things.
Of course, if somebody is elected president or vice president by nature of their office they’re going to have access to that stuff. I do recall during the Presidency of Barack Obama some folks had an issue with him having access to top secret things so I wonder how that would have worked out if this amendment were passed.
However, that would probably mean that the deep state would definitely want to protect themselves like Peter Strzok and Lisa Paige did in the 2016 election by text messages they were going to stop Trump because he was mean to people. I’m sure Monica remembers that whole Russia Russia Russia hoax thing that members of the feds took from the Clinton campaign and knew about 20 minutes in was bogus. Yet, political axes needed to be ground and that is what would happen here if you allowed the employees to run the show. That would be like allowing Monica in her former as an intern decide that Bill Clinton was worthy of the office she served.
Even if somebody were elected President that was a national security risk and it needed to be exposed you just do it the old-fashioned way and leak the info to The Washington Post. Unless of course his son was a security threat and was making boooku bucks for the BIG GUY, then you bury the story with help from your pals on social media.
Passing an amendment to the Constitution that has this type of authoritarian vibe is not really what we need in this country today and sounds a lil more like England where Monica lived for a bit in her exile of getting out of the country to clear her head.
Number three is a doozy.
The Constitution cannot be suspended. Full Stop. Even if the country is under martial law.
Monica claims she was troubled when she heard Mike Pence say during a debate earlier this year Trump wanted his Veep to put Trump over the Constitution and Monica was AGHAST.
Of course, she does not know that the meeting of the Electoral College had a process to deal with issues like this and was in that process when the Capitol was shut down. Pence could not have just thrown out electors at the behest of Trump. So her whole point for this is simply just a mess on a dress that you should get dry cleaned.
Also according to Webster here is the definition of Martial Law.
1. The law applied in occupied territory by the military authority of the occupying power.
2. The law administered by military forces that is invoked by a government in an emergency when the civilian law enforcement agencies are unable to maintain public order and safety.
I’m sure Ms. Lewinsky thought the Constitution being suspended EVEN under Martial law were two mutually exclusive ideas. In other words, if the law, which is the Constitution, is administered by (most likely) military forces means said Constitution is suspended even if there is a Lewinsky amendment saying no you don’t.
Thinking is hard and not for all.
The fourth is to get rid of the old people in office.
Not to be ageist, but there should also be a retirement age for elected officials as well as term limits, especially when you consider that long-term decisions can impact the citizens, the nation, and the world for years after you’ve served your time in office.
I love how people, including Monica right here, will start off on a faulty premise by saying she is not an ageist but then goes on to be an ageist.
So I’m not sure if she thinks young people do not make decisions that can impact citizens’ lives and even her own or magically only old people do that. While I agree that Joe Biden is a walking and talking disaster at 81, he was also one when he was 45 and just a Senator from a state most of Mónica’s peers could not find on a map.
We have limits right now for age or capability and they are called elections.
You can boot people out right now for many reasons someone’s age should not be limited of how long they can serve by an amendment to the Constitution. We all should remember that we are all getting old and were we all young once and did really dumb things on Spring Break or in Washington DC standing in line for hours looking to remind someone they have not called.
Number five shows that Monica did not get past School House Rock as a little one. She wants an amendment to get rid of the Electoral College.
The most fundamental underpinning of a democracy is the fact that those who govern are chosen through free and fair elections. Especially heads of state. The Electoral College ain’t it. State electors are appointed by methods determined by each state’s legislature. That makes it an inherently political system that detracts from the very heart of democratic governance. Moreover, the Electoral College was derived from a mindset that sought to protect slavery, so it is high time for it to go.
There is so much wrong with this that I’m wondering if I’m high like she claims she sometimes is in this article and I’m missing the point. I don’t have the munchies though so I’m not high.
The most fundamental underpinning of a REPUBLIC which we are, not a democracy, is elections done in a transparent manner and the laws are followed. Currently, that (should) mean that only citizens are allowed to vote and prove that they are such. Pretty simple.
State electors are chosen by the votes of the people in accordance with state laws and are no more a political system damaging the heart of democratic governance or any other nonsense piece written by Michael Kinsley than any other form of elections. I do miss his word salad posts though on politics, they always made me laugh.
The Electoral College was derived from minds who knew that a pure democracy would devolve into chaos and mob rule which is what we see in many countries around the world today. Hell, that is what we see on many college campuses today when Ben Shapiro shows up to speak to the minds full of mush. The electoral college was a compromise not meant to keep slaves as Lewinsky and her bubble gum brigade spew out regularly but to keep smaller states from getting run over by the larger ones.
Just a quick reading of the Federalist papers and the debate being had on editorial pages of newspapers at the time might clue one in on this. Also, a quick glance at a map of the smaller 13 colonies of the day and the concerns they had with New York and Pennsylvania running roughshod over them just with a pure popular vote.
If it were just popular votes then California, New York, and New Jersey could decide national elections all day long. That is a recipe for disaster and while Monica might love those recipes the majority of the country would not.
FINALLY number six.
We shall dub this the Abortions on Demand Amendment.
I’m going to skip over the Equal Rights Amendment conversation, being it is presumptuous of Monica to claim to know who is a woman or not and if they do or do not have equal rights already.
This is a subject that I’m sure Lewinsky has given scant thought to, but many people here at RedState have covered extensively (READ: Media Matters Feels Wrath of Riley Gaines After Hit Piece on Her Statements About Lia Thomas)
And while we’re at it—because you might be a woman or have a daughter, or, ya know, be a decent human being—let’s wedge in amendments such as the long-languishing Equal Rights Amendment, along with one that would reassert a woman’s right to reproductive freedom.
All of this does make me wonder what our Constitution and Bill of Rights would have looked like had they been created by founding mothers instead of fathers.
Now I’m not sure if she is espousing that you can only be a decent person if you think abortion on demand is necessary and should be added by amendment to the Constitution or not. I’m honestly still sorting out how she messed up the Martial Law point.
Yet in the nation’s Declaration of Independence at the very top is this semi-famous phrase. Possibly more famous than Monica’s former boss and his declaration that it depended on what the definition of “is” is.
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
How can a nation that says it is committed to “Human Rights”, enshrine in its law of the land the right to deprive Life in any phase from conception until death and be righteous or moral?
Monica Lewinsky has had 50 years of her life to enjoy the blessings of Liberty and her version of Happiness as she has seen fit. Loading up the United States Constitution with any sort of variance of this ending life does not sound like being a “decent human being” but more of a person with little value for themselves or other life.
I’m pretty sure that the Founding Mothers thought the same being most had the highest regard for their creator who endowed them with said unalienable rights. Just to make sure everyone knows creator means God. For those of us who are CHRISTians this verse from James 1:5 holds some meaning about life in totality. “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”
Now was society in America at the time unfair to those pioneering women? Of course it was, but go find the society that has not had to work through its flaws in the course of world history and was near pristine when it started. I’m sure you will find it close to next to never but rant on about America and her past injustices and take a trip to most of the Middle East in 2023 and see how rotten you have it here.
The Monica Lewinsky of the modern world did not need her last suggested amendments to flourish in America, she did it the old-fashioned way ( SCANDAL) and has become rich and infamous because of it. Thankfully she did, otherwise, she would never have had the platform she has to offer her unrefined views on changing the founding document of the greatest nation this world has ever known. Plus I would have not had the sheer pleasure of reading her writing about butchering the greatest document the world has ever seen.
Just barely beating out the Magna Carta and the Starr Report.
Now, I have to find out if Puck is doing as well as Ms. Lewinsky.
My fingers are crossed.
