Photo credit: Anadulo via AFP
by Mary Maxwell, LLB, current candidate for United States Senate
In the US there are, reportedly “two major Parties” and several smaller ones, such as the Greens and the Libertarians. Parties, as such, do not have any official role in the US government. They are private associations. In general, it’s good to form subject-matter groups, as how else would one feel part of a movement and develop some solidarity over issues?
That said, I think we should get rid of the Party system as a way of doing elections. What! Do I want a One-Party system? No freedom to choose? No, I want lots of freedom -- today the Parties very definitely limit the freedom of their members. They are also the enablers of power at the top who delight in seeing the divisiveness of Parties. “The more hate, the better.”
Let me refer to Party K and Party G, not revealing which ones I mean. Somebody in Party G will announce that they are going to support a bill for, say, locks on the gates of the local park. Immediately, with no reference to the merits of the case, Party K will express opposition. Also, if individual Party G members think the locked gates is a dumb idea, they won’t say so, out of Party loyalty. How ridiculous! How perverse!
I won’t waste your time on the subject of “weaponization” since it is, of itself, a trick being played to promote divisiveness. Most likely the media are the ringleaders. Hmm, when was the last time you heard any Network News anchor say “Oh for Pete’s sake, do these well-paid Congressmen ($174,000 pa) have to be so juvenile as to subordinate their thought processes to the Party G/Party K split day after day, year after year? Can’t they unite on anything?”
Here’s a bit of evidence that both K and G leaders want things to crawl to a halt. Last year, 2025, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, a Republican, delayed the swearing in of a properly elected new Democrat in aid of securing the vote Republicans wanted on such-and-such a bill. Democrats should have been gnashing their teeth, renting their garments, etc., at this outrageous behavior. (Johnson has no right to delay a swearing in.) But there was no gnashing and no renting. Everybody plays into the game. Congress accepts that “This is how it’s done.”
The Pugilist Party
Maybe it would be good if we had a Party that specialized in promoting foreign wars. Call it the Pugilist Party. They could write a manifesto stating the benefits of war. “It trains men to be fearless.” “It helps our weapons manufacturers stay afloat.” “It puts us at the top of the list for mineral grabs overseas.” Whatever. Then, any Americans who relate to that stuff could wear a lapel button or special-color baseball cap to express support.
As it stands today, “the Republicans” are considered to be the war party. This is not for any historical reason. LBJ a Democrat President, engaged us in the meaningless Vietnam War. George Bush, a Republican, was “in office” (but they say Dick Cheney ran it) during the Iraq war, for which the word “meaningless” also suits.
Oh, and I pause here to say that in late 2001, General Wesley Clark learned of a “Pentagon memo”. He reported it on Amy Goodman’s show, Democracy Now!, in 2007:
“This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out 7 countries in 5 years starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off with Iran.” (Note there was no need to plan an eighth, Afghanistan, as we were already there in 2001.)
Excuse me. Since when does my country “take out seven countries”? Actually we did do great violence in all of those places and very few Americans even know it. I’m a Republican and I can assure you I never heard such a plan discussed at meetings that I attended in 2006 when I was running for Congress. And does it fit into the Constitution in any way? Of course not. Hmm. I assumed Republicans are the famous “Party-of-the-Parchment.”
So again, we find people blaming a Party for today’s war on Iran, namely the Republican Party. And to bring Mike Johnson into this again, he, as Speaker, held back the votes against the Iran war, in June 2026, trying to make that Get-out-of-Iran vote disappear.
Dear Speaker Johnson, tell us really what was on your mind-- if anything – on that day. You could not have said “I’m pro-war cuz my Party is pro-war.” You must simply have been told to do what President Trump (or his real bosses) orders. Sir, it is not your job to be part of the Executive Branch. You should be replaced right away for such a booboo.
Let’s De-Westminsterize
Folks, let’s liberate ourselves!
The US Constitution arranges for democracy by having members (now 435) of the House of Representatives act on behalf of the wishes of their local constituents. Historically the Senators (now 100) were to act for their states, but the 17th Amendment changed that. All 535 should be acting for the People, not for a few bosses at the top.
Having lived in Australia for many years, I wgot accustomed to the Westminster system where the two main Parties (Liberal and Labor) control their members. Indeed Labor MPs are not allowed to vote at will. But this was not true in my youth in America. In those days no vote could be predicted -- any member could, and often did -- spring a surprise. But the Powers That Be snuck the Westminster system in, and we started to think it was legally required.
Let me quote from John Coleman’s 1992 book, “Conspirator’s Hierarchy,” page 170:
“Starting with James Earl Carter’s legal counsel Lloyd Cutler, a committee of constitutional lawyers has been working to change the US Congress into a non representative parliamentary system. Work has been in progress since 1979…. In the new parliamentary system members will not be responsible to their constituents but to parliamentary whips, and will vote the way they are told to vote. Thus, by judicial and bureaucratic subversion will the Constitution vanish. As will individual liberty.”
Note for persons perplexed about the Epstein phenomenon, Coleman also said in 1992, on page 170 of Conspirators’ Hierarchy:
“Pre-planned degrading of man through licentious sexual practices will be stepped up. New sexually degenerate cults are even now being set up by the British Crown, working through the SIS and MI 6 services. As we already know, all cults operating in the world today are the product of British intelligence acting for the oligarchic rulers.”
How do you like that!
I have a suggestion for hastening citizen enlightenment about the Westminster takeover: Encourage Dr Bill Cassidy of Louisiana to come clean as to why he changed his vote at the recent Senate confirmation of Blanche Todd as US Attorney General. Cassidy is a Republican and yet voted against the Party on that issue. In fact he went on TV to assure people that he would not be bought (not his exact words).
Plainly, Trump’s former lawyer, Todd Blanche, taking on the AG role is recognized conflict of interest. Yet, two days later, Cassidy changed his mind and voted Yes. I think it would be very valuable to see why he changed.
Chairs of Westminster
By the way, Congress should definitely get rid of its own rule, that gives the “majority Party” (what did I tell you) the chairmanship of every Committee. I quote the official website, Senate.gov, to show how flexible rules are:
“Seniority still matters, however, and the majority party member with the greatest seniority on a particular committee traditionally serves as chair. Practices also vary between the two parties. In 1995 the Republican conference changed its rules to allow senators on individual committees to vote by secret ballot for their committee’s chair, irrespective of seniority….. Both party conferences provide that when a state is represented by two senators of the same party, the two may not serve together on the same committee, though that rule can be waived by the members of the party.”
The foregoing is not law; it is a rule, per the Constitution’s Article I, section 5: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings.” It shows is that the majority system could end next week by a simple rule change in each House. I assure you that Congresspersons are under no legal obligation to do what their Party instructs.
Conclusion
1. Today’s divisive Party system is not native to the Great Republic; it was brought in by the oligarchs for a nefarious purpose: control. 2. It has resulted in the ludicrous situation today whereby the media pictures two tightly opposing Parties, causing Party members to concentrate on ‘loyalty.’ 3. In regard to war, the “Westminster” mentality leaves folks without Legislative restraint on presidential pugilism. 4. Article I, sec 5 enables a changing of the committee system, right now, to stop honoring Parties.
Thank God, the people are waking up. I think I feel a song coming on: “Crossing the Aisle in Style.” If you can create a dance for that, please do.
Note: I seek all-Party support for my 2026 lawsuit, Maxwell v Trump, which is about the unconstitutionality of our war in Iran.
Please watch these two videos. The first one is less than a minute:
In this important video, retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor apprises Judge Andrew Napolitano of our military’s ill-preparedness for war today:
-- Mary Maxwell can be contacted at her website, www.ConstitutionAndTruth.com, or can be emailed at MaxwellMaryLLB@gmail.com. The New Hampshire Primary is September 8, 2026.
🙏👍🏻👏🏻❤️