Trump on the US Constitution: ‘It’s like a foreign language”.

[bripat9643]

“It’s Like a Foreign Language”: Donald Trump’s Encounter With the Constitution Did Not Go Well

The documentary, titled The Words That Built America, was directed by Alexandra Pelosi, a daughter of House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi.​

Now there's an unbiased source.

Lol..as a I said plenty of witnesses were there and no one denies what happened. Try again.

Really? Quote them.

Read the link and the number of people present at the filming.

Where does the article say every person in the special witnessed Trump trying to read the passage? That would be rather unusual, wouldn't it?

Why would it be unusual for the cameraman or the film crew to be present?

So you think they were filming before any audition or rehearsal?

You really are a dumbass.

 

[Gdjjr]

Take up the dead constitution issue up with fellow Trumper Gdjjr.

You brought it up bub- I'm libertarian I don't subscribe to ANY politician or Party. I despise both equally no matter what stripe they, or their acolytes or detractors, call themselves wearing-

 

[bripat9643]

'Art of the Deal' co-author rips Trump: He's 'incapable of reading a book, much less writing one’

A liberal arts major.

 

[The Original Tree]

'Art of the Deal' co-author rips Trump: He's 'incapable of reading a book, much less writing one’

What was the last book you wrote, RW? I doubt you're capable of throwing a comic book together much less a non fiction.

Found it

 

[The Original Tree]

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

View attachment 301714

It all depends on Constitutional interpretation. An inane meme means nothing.

Nope its spot on. The Founding Father would have known that advances in firearms were inevitable and still they did not include any restrictions to the 2nd Amendment. If you people want restrictions call for a Constitutional Convention and do it the legal way. It would be hilarious watching it fail miserably

What makes you say that. I doubt the founding fathers had a clue how guns would evolve. The industrial revolution was just in its infancy.

The Founding Fathers knew that fire arms technology would evolve and that is why there are militia laws that require people to carry military grade weapons.

We are part of the homeland defense like The National Guard.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Oh oh another book. We know they wouldn't lie, would they.

That is the Trumpist:

View attachment 301713

that is many in politics....including your people....

 

[bripat9643]

The only part of the constitution that Trumpers quote is the 2nd amendment and with all due respect, like yourself, still can’t get it right.

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

 

[JLW]

Lol..as a I said plenty of witnesses were there and no one denies what happened. Try again.

Really? Quote them.

Read the link and the number of people present at the filming.

Where does the article say every person in the special witnessed Trump trying to read the passage? That would be rather unusual, wouldn't it?

Why would it be unusual for the cameraman or the film crew to be present?

So you think they were filming before any audition or rehearsal?

You really are a dumbass.

Another semi-literate Trumper who can't read or comprehend worth a damn. I have to remember to really dumb it down for you.

 

[JLW]

The only part of the constitution that Trumpers quote is the 2nd amendment and with all due respect, like yourself, still can’t get it right.

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

If you weren't such a friggin idiot you would see the contradiction you make in your own post.

 

[bripat9643]

Really? Quote them.

Read the link and the number of people present at the filming.

Where does the article say every person in the special witnessed Trump trying to read the passage? That would be rather unusual, wouldn't it?

Why would it be unusual for the cameraman or the film crew to be present?

So you think they were filming before any audition or rehearsal?

You really are a dumbass.

Another semi-literate Trumper who can't read or comprehend worth a damn. I have to remember to really it dumb it down for you.

I understand it perfectly.

 

[bripat9643]

The only part of the constitution that Trumpers quote is the 2nd amendment and with all due respect, like yourself, still can’t get it right.

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

If you weren't such a friggin idiot you would see the contradiction you make in your own post.

What contradiction?

 

[rightwinger]

'Art of the Deal' co-author rips Trump: He's 'incapable of reading a book, much less writing one’

What was the last book you wrote, RW? I doubt you're capable of throwing a comic book together much less a non fiction.

I did write a book on my family history.
Unlike Trump, I did all the research myself and didn’t need a ghost writer

Also, unlike Trump, I have actually read the whole thing multiple times

 

[rightwinger]

The only part of the constitution that Trumpers quote is the 2nd amendment and with all due respect, like yourself, still can’t get it right.

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

Hundreds of years of case law define the document

 

[JLW]

Read the link and the number of people present at the filming.

Where does the article say every person in the special witnessed Trump trying to read the passage? That would be rather unusual, wouldn't it?

Why would it be unusual for the cameraman or the film crew to be present?

So you think they were filming before any audition or rehearsal?

You really are a dumbass.

Another semi-literate Trumper who can't read or comprehend worth a damn. I have to remember to really it dumb it down for you.

I understand it perfectly.

You understand squat.

 

[JLW]

The only part of the constitution that Trumpers quote is the 2nd amendment and with all due respect, like yourself, still can’t get it right.

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

If you weren't such a friggin idiot you would see the contradiction you make in your own post.

What contradiction?

Figure it out.

 

[bripat9643]

The only part of the constitution that Trumpers quote is the 2nd amendment and with all due respect, like yourself, still can’t get it right.

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

Hundreds of years of case law define the document

That's the problem with it. Most of that case law is horseshit.

 

[bripat9643]

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

If you weren't such a friggin idiot you would see the contradiction you make in your own post.

What contradiction?

Figure it out.

I already have. There's no contradiction.

 

[Gdjjr]

Hundreds of years of case law define the document

No, words define the document. Case law defines actions. Words mean things. Without definition interpretation doesn't exist.

 

[rightwinger]

The only part of the constitution that Trumpers quote is the 2nd amendment and with all due respect, like yourself, still can’t get it right.

I expect I've forgotten more about the constitution than most here will ever know- I used that simple stanza as a reminder, sir, that the body politic on neither side pays much attention to the rules written for them. In fact, dear nancy has said it's a living document- which is physically impossible as it is an inert piece of paper agreed to by those who sign it and swear an oath to protect it- please don't embarrass yourself in public.

When it comes to constitution interpretation the question is whether it is a living document or a dead document is an on-going debate. Pelosi is right it is a living document. (Unlike yourself apparently, most people do not actually think the document is alive). Scalia was wrong that the document is dead. But of course if you think it is a dead document then I suppose when we talking about 2nd amendment, if the document is dead, and it died in 1789 and we must look at the intent of the founders, the only arms permitted are muskets.

But I am sure though not positive, do you think the constitution written like a foreign language?

ROFL! Only the people who wipe their ass on it claim it's a "living document." The Constitution is a contract. Those are utterly worthless if the parties to it are free to change the terms at their convenience.

Hundreds of years of case law define the document

That's the problem with it. Most of that case law is horseshit.

Then go to court and prove it is unconstitutional
Most federal judges are Conservative, shouldn’t be hard

 

[rightwinger]

Hundreds of years of case law define the document

No, words define the document. Case law defines actions. Words mean things. Without definition interpretation doesn't exist.

Case law define the words that are ambiguous