If Hillary had won the election there would no longer be a Bill of Rights

[Bassman007]

Come on, ya gotta love the local retards

 

[Smedley VonBuren]

Come on, ya gotta love the local retards

My God, people are dumb.

 

[Bassman007]

Come on, ya gotta love the local retards

My God, people are dumb.

50 percent of Americans are just like her

 

[Smedley VonBuren]

Come on, ya gotta love the local retards

My God, people are dumb.

50 percent of Americans are just like her

Thank God for the Electoral College.

 

[Bassman007]

Come on, ya gotta love the local retards

My God, people are dumb.

50 percent of Americans are just like her

Thank God for the Electoral College.

It's kind of creepy how smart the founding fathers were

 

[Little-Acorn]

Of course there would still be a Bill of Rights.

It would just be peppered with exceptions, "re-interpretations", "it didn't really mean that", and on and on, until it no longer meant anything like what the people who wrote and ratified it, intended. Now it would mean that people could have these various rights if and when the Fed govt decided they could. And that any nameless, faceless bureaucrat could suspend or take away any of the rights he wanted, for any reason he though justified.

In fact, to a great extent, it already is.

 

[rightwinger]

It is Trump attacking the First Amendment

He has this thing about a free press

 

[Doc1]

It is Trump attacking the First Amendment

He has this thing about a free press

Naaa, he has this thing about a lying press.

 

[The Professor]

It is Trump attacking the First Amendment

He has this thing about a free press

I disagree. Read this:

“Amendment I.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

The first amendment is not just for the press; rather it for everyone. In practical application the First Amendment provides that the press is free to criticize Trump and Trump is equally free to criticize the press. You apparently think that the press is above criticism based upon the First Amendment and this is simply not true.

As far as I know, Trump has never done anything to stifle the press. He has not threatened the press nor has he used his power as president in any way to control what the press publishes. Trump simply called them out on the garbage they were printing. That's his right. Hell, that's his duty.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It is Trump attacking the First Amendment

He has this thing about a free press

Obama promised transparency. But his administration is one of the most secretive

 

[Little-Acorn]

Of course there would still be a Bill of Rights.

It would just be peppered with exceptions, "re-interpretations", "it didn't really mean that", and on and on, until it no longer meant anything like what the people who wrote and ratified it, intended. Now it would mean that people could have these various rights if and when the Fed govt decided they could. And that any nameless, faceless bureaucrat could suspend or take away any of the rights he wanted, for any reason he though justified.

In fact, to a great extent, it already is.

 

[xyz]

Doood, if Ross Perot won the (whatever year it was) election....


dumbfuck