52 Comments
User's avatar
Andy Borowitz's avatar

Happy World Press Freedom Day! And thank you for supporting what I do ♥️

Carol Tidwell's avatar

How do we view the film? My tech abilities are pretty slim.

Peter Shaw's avatar

Freedom & democracy under siege? Not on our watch. Start with press freedom. Finish with “86-47”!

Klarity's avatar

2547 would work too

Patty Farrington's avatar

I'm grateful for you Andy! Thank you for sharing such a powerful and important documentary, and for keeping hope and humor front and center in such a perilous time.

Sarah McAuliffe-Bellin's avatar

I’ve shared across every platform except Twitter because I don’t have it anymore. Happy World Press Freedom Day. Keep Journalism free, unimpeded and keep journalists alive and out of prison.

karen strano's avatar

It is a powerful movie. I've watched it twice already.

Gloria J. Maloney's avatar

How did you watch it? I've tried repeatedly.

Gloria J. Maloney's avatar

Now it worked. Thank you. The page is different.

Christina  A.'s avatar

It works only when you are in the U.S. unless you use a VPN.

karen strano's avatar

Glad to see you got some help.

Gloria J. Maloney's avatar

I'm skeptical of anyone trading my information for something for free.

Susan Sonnesyn Brooks's avatar

You three are amazing. Thank you for not giving up on sane Americans. More, please!!

Shannon Kincaid's avatar

Ten minutes into your interview with Ann and Laura and I'm enthralled! Can't wait to see the film, Andy! Thank you for this!! ❤️

Jim (Bombguy24)'s avatar

Thank you for the post. Will be watching the film later today. One more, of many, reasons to be on Substack.

Louise Wollman's avatar

Thank you so much for this free gift for FREEDOM! A few questions. Two films called DEMOCRACY UNDER SIEGE pop up when I click, one 55 minutes, the other 89 minutes. Are they duplicative? And, can I share the free link widely with others? Thanks again.

BOBD's avatar
29mEdited

In the 89-minute video, at about 5:36, Steven Levitsky says that amending the Constitution requires a 2/3 vote in the House, and a 2/3 vote in the Senate. That is not true. Article V says "The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments...".

Dictionary.com says for "both": "adjective one and the other; two together".

Merriam Webster says "adjective being the two : affecting or involving the one and the other".

That means any combination of Representatives or Senators can propose amendments, that is any 357 members of the 535 Members of Congress. For example, that could be 357 members of the House, with no members of the Senate.

It seems reasonable to take the meaning to be "each", rather than "both". But "reasonable" has no place in rigorous legal documents.

This is typical of the slipshod composition that hamstrings the Constitution.

https://www.democracyundersiegedoc.org/videos/v/watch-89min

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/both

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/both

John  (NJ-VT)'s avatar

Real good but sad.

The Yuck Yuck Syndicate's avatar

many thank you's AB for interviewing these two amazing Artists. We still have Enlightenment, right?

Mark Lip's avatar

Thanks to Ann and Laura for making the film which I am about to see and to Andy for this interview. Seashell collectors unite!

RYK's avatar

Thank you all for your courage and humor in shining a spotlight on! Ann, I’m a retired English teacher and editor and would edit anything for you for free😉.

Eva Camacho Guzman's avatar

Thank you so much for this great information. I appreciate any and all of you. I will watch and share. 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼

LJudith's avatar

This documentary is amazing! Thank you for sharing :)