GNU social JP
  • FAQ
  • Login
GNU social JPは日本のGNU socialサーバーです。
Usage/ToS/admin/test/Pleroma FE

  • Public

    • Public
    • Network
    • Groups
    • Featured
    • Popular
    • People

Conversation

Notices

  1. Embed this notice
    FreedomPatriot (freepatriot@merovingian.club)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:28 JST FreedomPatriot FreedomPatriot

    Wow.

    Americans say the collapse of the USA is perfectly acceptable.

    In conversation about 3 months ago from merovingian.club permalink
    • Embed this notice
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? (humpleupagus@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:21 JST ?? Humpleupagus ?? ?? Humpleupagus ??
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      Wouldn't rebellion be within the political question doctrine, and hence constitutional, if it were determined that the rebellion within a state was the legitimate government of that state. 🤔
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Bianca (bianca@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:22 JST Bianca Bianca
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • AmonMaritza
      @WilhelmIII @AmonMaritza @freepatriot Yes, the piece of paper is the document, but ultimately it's men who are willing to fight, ' it's a Republic if you can keep it '
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:22 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      Actually, the piece of paper was written to stop men that were willing to fight.

      Research CAPT Daniel Shays.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:23 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      But the Constitution is the document of our government.

      The revolutionaries won our freedom from the UK.

      The lawyers took it back.

      Patrick Henry had some very bad things to say about the Constitution. He wasn't invited to the convention.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:24 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      Incorrect.

      The Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union were written by patriot revolutionaries.

      The Constitution was written by lawyers.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      AmonMaritza (amonmaritza@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:24 JST AmonMaritza AmonMaritza
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • Bianca
      I meant the country was founded by revolutionaries, as in we were birthed in a Revolution. We celebrate Independence Day, not Constitution Day, as the day of our founding.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      AmonMaritza (amonmaritza@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:25 JST AmonMaritza AmonMaritza
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • Bianca
      it was founded by revolutionaries so 1A and 2A.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Bianca (bianca@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:26 JST Bianca Bianca
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      @WilhelmIII @freepatriot The constitution is supposed to be defended by men with militias. Americans are too fat and scared to form them.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:26 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • Bianca
      There is no "or else" clause anywhere in the Constitution.

      Article 1, Section 8 and the 10th amendment should both have an "or else" clause.

      But they don't.

      Either that was on purpose or it was a horrible oversight.

      Either way, the Constitution does not have an actual, written recourse in it for what to do when the Constitution is just ignored by people in government.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:00:27 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      Pretty much.

      If the Constitution was supposed to keep evil men from usurping power, then it failed and let those men enslave us.

      If the Constitution was supposed to let evil men enslave us then it failed to keep us free.

      Either way, the American Experiment in limited government was a failure and it's probably time to try something else.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:05:37 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • ?? Humpleupagus ??
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      The Articles didn't really specify what kind of government each state could have, just that the delegates to the Congress had to be appointed by their state governments.

      The Constitution requires a republican form of government.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? likes this.
    • Embed this notice
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? (humpleupagus@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:05:40 JST ?? Humpleupagus ?? ?? Humpleupagus ??
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      https://www.britannica.com/event/Luther-v-Borden#ref58026
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink

      Attachments

      1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: cdn.britannica.com
        Luther v. Borden | State Sovereignty, Federalism & Civil War
        Luther v. Borden, (1849), U.S. Supreme Court decision growing out of the 1842 conflict in Rhode Island called the “Dorr Rebellion.” In the spring of 1842, Rhode Island had two governors and two legislatures. One government was committed to retaining the old colonial charter, which severely limited
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:07:50 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • ?? Humpleupagus ??
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      Yeah, another weakness of the Constitution.

      The Supreme Court can decide to just not get involved.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? likes this.
    • Embed this notice
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? (humpleupagus@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:09:35 JST ?? Humpleupagus ?? ?? Humpleupagus ??
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      This is the best doctrine. It has been misused in just about every case, and no one does shit.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_secrets_privilege#:~:text=%22The%20state%20secrets%20privilege%20is,security.%22%20%E2%80%93%20Zuckerbraun%20v.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink

      Attachments

      1. No result found on File_thumbnail lookup.
        State secrets privilege
        The state secrets privilege is an evidentiary rule created by United States legal precedent. Application of the privilege results in exclusion of evidence from a legal case based solely on affidavits submitted by the government stating that court proceedings might disclose sensitive information which might endanger national security. United States v. Reynolds, which involved alleged military secrets, was the first case that saw formal recognition of the privilege. Following a claim of "state secrets privilege", the court rarely conducts an in camera examination of the evidence to evaluate whether there is sufficient cause to support the use of this doctrine. This results in court rulings in which even the judge has not verified the veracity of the assertion. The privileged material is completely removed from the litigation, and the court must determine how the unavailability of the privileged information affects the case. Function The purpose of the state secrets privilege is to prevent courts from revealing state secrets in the course of civil litigation. The government may intervene in any civil suit, including when...
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:12:38 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • ?? Humpleupagus ??
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      Following a claim of "state secrets privilege", the court rarely conducts an in camera examination of the evidence to evaluate whether there is sufficient cause to support the use of this doctrine. This results in court rulings in which even the judge has not verified the veracity of the assertion.

      😡
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? likes this.
    • Embed this notice
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? (humpleupagus@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 18:20:23 JST ?? Humpleupagus ?? ?? Humpleupagus ??
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • AmonMaritza
      • Bianca
      > If we are killing people, it's a secret.
      In conversation about 3 months ago permalink

Feeds

  • Activity Streams
  • RSS 2.0
  • Atom
  • Help
  • About
  • FAQ
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • Source
  • Version
  • Contact

GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.