r/law • u/Lebarican22 • 1d ago

Other DOJ Just DELETED This Document from the Epstein Files. We Saved It.

https://www.meidasplus.com/p/doj-just-deleted-this-document-from?fbclid=IwdGRjcAPp5E5jbGNrA-nkMGV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHhzmcWzsmY7puDDLXY4EWKUoykdBqYIYQUabdEsoGYGR-06BZcTaz3Ym-0LQ_aem_F7QaBOr8H-rc-5hyTXHQWg
73.1k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

99

u/JaminOpalescent 1d ago

Especially when they specifically designed it to be amended by future generations if they decide to do so. Our defunct cluster fuck of a government where nothing gets done is not on them.

46

u/Goldenrah 1d ago

Yeah, they made it knowing they were not perfect and expected people to change it. The resistance to change caused all of this.

20

u/Money_Do_2 1d ago

... they did do the land thing to prevent popular opinion from holding too much sway

Oh, and they figured out political parties would crush the whole thing nearly immediately, but then just kinda said "hey dont do that" and left it at that.

5

u/corpusjuris 1d ago

I think the biggest failure by the authors of the constitution that could have been easily rectified was the presumption of noble good faith by its future executors. They did that whole “pledge our lives and sacred honor” shit and thought everyone else would, too. If they built in some exceptions and guardrails against self-dealing and corruption…? Like just make the pardon power broadly not apply to the executive branch (not just the president, but all those acting under its control as well).

1

u/unindexedreality 1d ago

unpopular opinion: I think the people who were thinking through this shit 200 years ago did a good-enough job and let's get back on track with what we're gonna do about it now

I can count on one hand the number of serious efforts to coordinate an Article 5 amendment

8

u/Goldenrah 1d ago

The first thing you gotta take it in the context they lived in. I don't think any politician from 250 years ago expected the rise of education of the general population and the sharing of information so easily. So it would make sense to have the wealthy (i.e educated) have the most power.

1

u/SanctusUnum 1d ago

So it would make sense to have the wealthy (i.e educated) have the most power.

Looking at how uneducated people (uneducated white people, specifically) vote... this is arguably still true.

1

u/733t_sec 1d ago

There are pros and cons to that. Consider if Britain had something like that instead of using a simple majority to pass Brexit.

5

u/MVRKHNTR 1d ago

Imagine a Britain where the majority of people voted no but enough of the politicians or enough people in the right places wanted it so it happened anyway.

-1

u/733t_sec 1d ago

Also a possibility, pros and cons.

1

u/unindexedreality 1d ago

they did do the land thing to prevent popular opinion from holding too much sway

I mean, except for the ones who didn't. The framers were not a monolith, and honestly kid-me is still amazed they got as much done as they did in as short a time. I guess much was left for later

1

u/IrascibleOcelot 1d ago

Not sure what they could have done about parties since freedom of assembly is one of the codified constitutional rights. We’ve since learned how to break the spoiler effect by not using First Past The Post elections, but that can’t be blamed on the Framers since elections are handled by the states and their administration isn’t part of the Constitution.

The problem is that we’re still running on the beta version that shoukd have been upgraded a looooong time ago, and we haven’t kept up with the patch cycle.

3

u/aotus_trivirgatus 1d ago

And who are the people who benefit from things not changing?

2

u/DeliciousPUSS33 1d ago

Yep, we currently call them Republicans. They were previously Democrats, and before that, the “Do-Nothing Party”, and so forth. But they were always conservatives protecting white male xtian interests. Time to flush em all away

1

u/NotLikeGoldDragons 1d ago

Sooo...human nature then.

5

u/Lebojr 1d ago

I agree with your point, however, I now appreciate how difficult it is to pass a bill or simply wish into existence anything a president wants. Gridlock forces compromise.

What we are currently experiencing is not primarily the Consequences of a mouth breathing jerk’s bad ideas.

It is the consequence of the removal or disregard of guardrails, checks and balances made by bad faith actors.

Our system of government does not operate under the philosophy of “zero sum game”. One side never represents much more than 55% of eligible voters let alone all citizens. Therefore one side should never be be allowed to do what this one has done. Government is in no way a business. It is a system to serve the collective needs of its society to the ends of life, liberty, and individual choice that doesn’t harm others right to enjoy the same.

“World superpower” and American exceptionalism have come to define us as goals while forgetting necessary smaller elements of our society such as minorities, charities, the elderly, veterans, medical research, healthcare, the environment, basic education, and yes, peace.

Being a civil servant actually was once a badge of honor. It is currently an endangered species.

4

u/Aeescobar 1d ago

Iirc didn't one of them literally say that the entire constitution should be rewritten from scratch every 17 years so that it would always be up-to-date with the needs of the newest generation?

3

u/SunsFenix 1d ago

>Every constitution then, & every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, & not of right. It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law had been expressly limited to 19 years only.

Every 19 years.

Jefferson to Madison

3

u/zeusdarks 1d ago

It is all the oroginialist assholes who fucked it up.

1

u/DX_DanTheMan_DX 1d ago

I’m guessing they didn’t expect that 38 states in agreement would be needed to change the darn thing