"There's no statute or specific provision of the Constitution that specifically authorizes

[First Speaker]

94. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments came about solely because of a civil war...

...which came about solely because of the increasing arrogance of the Southern Planter class, which was openly trying to destroy the principles upon which this nation was founded. The Federal government, from 1788-1860, essentially was a mechanism for defending slavery. It certainly had become that by the time of Lincoln's election, and the planters committed suicide because they felt that election meant they weren't in control anymore--which of course was true. The point is, those three amendments came about *only* because the "constitutional order" had collapsed. I think what the author of this thread was suggesting is, we have approached a crisis of democracy as serious as 1860, and that what we regard as the "constitutional order" might turn out to be as fragile as it was then. If we have a President with dictatorial ambitions, with a party behind him that ultimately will not oppose them, and a Supreme Court stacked with Kavanaughs who will let the dictator do whatever he wants...and a crooked "voting system" as well--does anyone really know what happened in the 2016 election? I sure don't--then we are not living under the "constitution" as we have understood it. If the USA moves towards a one-party system, like Poland or Hungary or indeed Russia, and everything happens "constitutionally"--what do we do to save liberal democracy? I don't know. But to think that this isn't where we're headed is to bury your head in the sand.