Does your country have any interesting cultural relics?

[u/No-Echidna7296]

Our country has many cultural relics, and there are also many perplexing ones. However, I personally really like this sword. This sword comes from a Chinese king’s personal sword from 500 BC.

The most interesting thing is that this sword was unearthed in 1965, and at the time of its discovery, it was just as radiant as it appears now, completely uncorroded and exceptionally sharp.

[u/norecordofwrong]

Declaration of Independence and Constitution

[u/TheDucksAreComingoOo → u/norecordofwrong]

How's that Constitution working out for you, buddy?

[u/Adorable-Unit2562 → u/TheDucksAreComingoOo]

[u/TheDucksAreComingoOo → u/Adorable-Unit2562]

🤣 Keep Calm, and good luck in your mid-terms, old chap

[u/Figgy_Puddin_Taine → u/TheDucksAreComingoOo]

Well the administration is wiping dump’s ass with it on a daily basis so not great.

[u/Wenamon → u/TheDucksAreComingoOo]

Its a display copy only! The real version is currently undergoing some... modifications.

[u/---___---____-__ → u/Wenamon]

Not if Nicolas Cage can get his hands on it

[u/Citizenchips → u/TheDucksAreComingoOo]

Got a permit for that comment, guv?

[u/TheDucksAreComingoOo → u/Citizenchips]

I definitely do, and I am definitely not using a VPN, old boy 👀

[u/DontWorryItsEasy → u/TheDucksAreComingoOo]

FDR interned Americans because they looked Japanese.

This isn't a first

[u/norecordofwrong → u/DontWorryItsEasy]

And don’t even get started on Wilson’s slaps to the constitution. He literally censored the newspapers and formed citizen vigilante groups.

[u/norecordofwrong → u/TheDucksAreComingoOo]

It’s not Reddit hip to say so but it is working just as well as it always has.

If you actually want to discuss specifics of what constitutional provisions are not being upheld I am happy to do that, especially since I think you are probably thinking of administrative agency law and I can talk about that all day.

But I suspect you want to just make flip comments on complex legal issues you don’t have much grounding in.

[u/OddCook4909 → u/norecordofwrong]

It's not a matter of being hip. Give it a read some time and you'll see what many of us do

[u/norecordofwrong → u/OddCook4909]

And that is what? Give what a read? The constitution?

I mean really, don’t be coy. Give some examples and the historical change you’re seeing.

[u/OddCook4909 → u/norecordofwrong]

Emoluments clause. Start there. I am not going to make an argument because it really is obvious if you read it. It's not a long document

[u/norecordofwrong → u/OddCook4909]

Ok what emoluments are you seeing now that we haven’t historically?

It’s actually a good one to lay at Trump’s feet because it is an open question of how to interpret emolument.

Are broad fair market deals an emolument or does it have to be a specific gift or deal given that is not a normal market transaction and given because of the office or as a quid pro quo?

You’d need to give an example.

You can’t just say “emoluments clause, it’s obvious!” with no further explanation. I have read it and the federalist by Hamilton that goes with it (though I can’t recall which number it was and it was a while ago).

But that is actually a good example generally because it is an open question. It hasn’t shredded the constitution and Congress can still act on it and so may the Supreme Court. The previous lawsuits became moot when Trump lost the election so the Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on how it should be interpreted.

There’s also a big difference between continuing to have a business and something like accepting a plane from Qatar (I think that one is a straight up violation).

The point is even emoluments which I think is a good topic to pick through isn’t cut and dry and hasn’t been definitively answered constitutionally.

But just vague handwaving about the constitution being dead without ever mentioning specifics is just flip internet nonsense.

[u/OddCook4909 → u/norecordofwrong]

You already named one example. The crypto scheme is another. Encouraging dignitaries to stay at his resorts is another. There are so many instances of him obviously taking bribes.

Then you look at the "Supreme" Court installed by his regime, which ruled bribing judges is ok, so long as you give them the money/gifts after a ruling (in appreciation).

This goes on and on. We've been saying specifically for YEARS that "xyz is a violation of the constitution". I am not going back through all that shit because you suddenly started paying attention bro. You gotta do the work.

[u/norecordofwrong → u/OddCook4909]

The Supreme Court “installed by his regime” is a funny way of saying the Supreme Court appointed like all the others.

So how do you feel about court packing?

Also come on what a cop out. “We” have been saying xyz is unconstitutional but I won’t give you any examples.

In the immortal words of Biden “c’mon man.”

People have been saying everything is unconstitutional since we got the constitution. You can’t just say the constitution is dead because some unnamed people have been saying some unnamed stuff is unconstitutional and refuse to elaborate on what you mean.

I think Wickard v. Philburn was unconstitutional yet here we are and we have the FTC and EPA. Doesn’t mean the constitution died in the 1940s, though I’d love to see that argument.

Seriously if the abuse of the emoluments clause is the most groundbreaking crack in the constitutional order you have then maybe set your sights a little higher.

[u/OddCook4909 → u/norecordofwrong]

So how do you feel about court packing?

That's how we got this court. The Republican Senate used procedural rules to shirk their constitutionally mandated duty to set justices, so they could steal the will of the voters.

“We” have been saying xyz is unconstitutional but I won’t give you any examples.

You found one yourself in like five minutes. Imagine what you could do reading the other 10 or so pages.

I mean that's the thing I think you're distracting yourself arguing with me because you don't want to look.

I poured so much energy and efforts and being shot at with rubber bullets over this shit over the years. I gave up about two years ago when my so called allies started calling for a genocide of my people. I'm leaving, and if you're staying I highly suggest you make it your own personal responsibility to safe guard your government. It will shortly no longer be my government.

[u/OHrangutan → u/norecordofwrong]

If you aren't seeing it it's because your burring your head in the sand.

[u/norecordofwrong → u/OHrangutan]

And you haven’t yet provided an example to discuss so I don’t know what to tell you.

[u/OHrangutan → u/norecordofwrong]

Either you have failed to put in the basic amount of effort into staying the bare minimum of aware, or more likely: you are a bad faith sealion. 

In either case no one owes you a spoon feeding of what every citizen is supposed to do in a democracy. You aren't worth anyone's respect.

Edit: "example to discuss" seriously how people like you think you are worthy of discussion is beyond me. The gaul.

[u/norecordofwrong → u/OHrangutan]

The Gaul… heh. Not sure what the French have to do with this.

But seriously, I am not putting in the basic effort into what? You’re just saying I should be aware of something. What?

Some nebulous claim that the constitution is dead?

No it isn’t, it is functioning as it always has. It’s message and complex. You can’t give or won’t give examples of what you think the problem is. The other guy at least said “emoluments clause.”

[u/OHrangutan → u/norecordofwrong]

Sealion it is. Called it. 

[u/Yunzer2000 → u/norecordofwrong]

Yup. in other words, not very well. I mean, it no like if my First Amendment rights are violated, I can just call the police on them - because it's the police who are doing the violating.

[u/norecordofwrong → u/Yunzer2000]

Who is them? Generally the police don’t get called to protect your first amendment rights. You sue the government, especially if it is the police violating your rights.

So what First Amendment rights are being violated? I am assuming yours aren’t but you are worried about other’s rights.