Don Lemon’s call to ‘blow up the entire system’ even makes CNN colleague Chris Cuomo uncomfortable

Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE

CHECK OUT for best SWAG!

CNN’s Don Lemon’s call on Monday to “blow up the entire system” of government in response to President Donald Trump’s intention to name Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s successor got major pushback from network colleague Chris Cuomo.

“We’re gonna have to blow up the entire system. And you know what we’re gonna have to do?” Lemon began.

“Ah, I don’t know about that,” Cuomo responded.

“Yes, you know what we’re gonna have to do?” Lemon repeated.

“You just gotta vote,” Cuomo interjected.

But Lemon pressed. “Honestly, from what your closing argument is, you’re gonna have to get rid of the Electoral College.

“I don’t see it,” Cuomo retorted.

“Because the people…because the minority in this country decide who the judges are, they decide who the president is,” Lemon continued. “Is that fair?”

“But you need a constitutional amendment to do that,” Cuomo, who is a lawyer, said.

Ignoring Cuomo, Lemon continued, suggesting that he wants Democratic nominee Joe Biden to pack the Supreme Court with left-leaning ideologues if he wins.

“And if Democrats — if Joe Biden wins, Democrats can stack the courts, and they can do that amendment, and they can get it passed,” he said, seemingly oblivious to the process of ratifying new amendments to the Constitution.

Cuomo tried to give Lemon a quick civics lesson.

“Well, you need two-thirds vote in the Congress and three-quarters of the state legislatures,” he explained.

“They may be able to do that,” Lemon persisted.

“Maybe,” said Cuomo, “but that’s a tall order.”

(Source: CNN)

Lemon’s complaint echoed those made by Democrats, who issued various threats including a vow to ‘pack’ the Supreme Court, presumably with left-leaning justices, suggesting that the party doesn’t really believe in the independence of the federal judiciary.

As for Lemon’s ‘civic lesson’ from Cuomo, there are two ways to amend the Constitution, and neither of them has anything to with ‘the courts’ — the Judicial Branch.

Per Article V:

— Two-thirds of both chambers of Congress can propose new amendments;

— Two-thirds of all states can petition Congress to convene a convention for the sole purpose of proposing new amendments.

In both cases, three-quarters of the state legislatures, either in session or in convention, must then vote to ratify the new amendment.

It is an arduous process, and was designed to be; our founders did not want to make the process of changing or amending the Constitution easy because they feared future generations could eliminate basic protections and guarantees, or — as Lemon has suggested — the system of government itself.

In his rant, Lemon repeated an oft-stated Democrat talking point — that a “minority” of Americans elected President Donald Trump because he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton, though some analysts have suggested that Clinton’s popular vote majority came from a single state, California.

As for the Senate, where judicial and Supreme Court nominees are sent to receive advice and consent — or rejection — members are elected by majorities in their states.

In terms of awarding electors to presidential contenders, states decide that process, not the courts and not Congress, per the Constitution.

Also, the institution of the Electoral College was part of a major compromise at the Constitutional Convention in 1787; without it, there might never have been a United States.

Our founders did not want presidents elected by popular vote — a pure democracy — because they feared that larger population centers in just a few places around the country would wind up choosing the president year after year, thus alienating rural, less populated portions of the country.

“The Electoral College was an ingenious compromise, allowing the popular election of the president, but on a state-by-state basis,” says an explainer published by the U.S. National Endowment for the Humanities a few days after the 2016 election.

“Citizens vote for president, with the winner in each state taking all the state’s electoral votes based on the number of seats that state has in the Senate and House combined,” the explainer continues.

“In this sense, the Electoral College is no more ‘undemocratic’ than is the Senate or the Supreme Court. Without this large vs. small state compromise, the Convention of 1787 may not have succeeded.”

Users responded to the exchange between Lemon and Cuomo online.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Jon Dougherty


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.


Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Latest Articles