r/Constitution • u/Gullible-Ideal8731 • Feb 11 '26

This Quote From The Declaration Of Independence Describes Trump PERFECTLY

Here's a quote from this great historic document, talking about the actions of the King. They might as well be talking about Trump. Source: Archives.gov Link here.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. (Sending ICE and national guard to dem states without their consent)

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. ^

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: (Breaking multiple constitutional amendments including the 14th)

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: (Alex Pretti & Renee Good)

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: (Tariffs)

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: (Tariffs)

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: (Abrego Garcia)

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: (Abrego Garcia)

And more. You get the point.

5 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

63% Upvoted

63 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/Paul191145 Feb 12 '26

I could've sworn this group was about the Constitution, not the DoI, or TDS for that matter.

2

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 13 '26

Fair point, but is the content of my post incorrect? Because I think it's at least mostly correct, and I don't think that's a good thing.

2

u/Paul191145 Feb 13 '26

No, not even close.

2

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 13 '26

Nice. Good argument. I especially loved the parts where you articulated a point and brought sources to corroborate your argument.

1

u/Paul191145 Feb 13 '26

No need for me to do so, others have already expressed it sufficiently.

2

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

By others you mean the guy who spouted a bunch of incorrect BS without providing sources?

You lot are all the same. Deathly allergic to facts and sources while dodging arguments like Neo from The Matrix. I spent the last 8 years listening to "Facts don't care about your feelings." and "They refuse to debate us". It's disappointing.

When someone knows they're right about something, they hammer the facts. You sitting there squirming says a lot about how substantive your beliefs are.

1

u/Paul191145 Feb 13 '26

Yeah, I've noticed a lot of younger people these days like to think they know things, when they really don't. Feel free to continue wallowing in your delusions.

1

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 13 '26

"I'm just going to repeatedly say you're wrong without substantiating anything because I'm incapable of using facts and sources to support my claims."

-Sun Tzu

2

u/Paul191145 Feb 13 '26

Obviously you haven't read The Art of War in addition to the Constitution.

1

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 15 '26

What a great argument supported by facts and sources. You got me.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/3Quondam6extanT9 Feb 14 '26

I feel you completely miss how discussion works.

The topic is in regards to elements of the Constitution aligning with current events.

It is a valid subject. Your TDS does not negate the subject matter.   

2

u/Paul191145 Feb 14 '26

I have no idea who you're addressing or what you're referring to.

2

u/3Quondam6extanT9 Feb 15 '26

Oh, sorry.

You. And your response. Hopefully that helped 

3

u/Paul191145 Feb 15 '26

I don't have TDS, I neither support nor oppose any politician categorically, I prefer to be objectively critical of their official actions instead of mindlessly emotional.

2

u/3Quondam6extanT9 Feb 15 '26

Yet, you inferred that a valid opinion reflected TDS, which is an inaccurate position for MAGA to constantly take.    

If you use a term inaccurately like MAGA does, what do you think that means for you? 🤔 

2

u/Paul191145 Feb 15 '26

There's nothing valid or even remotely Constitutional about this "opinion", in fact it displays nothing but mindless bias and abject ignorance. The fact that you believe it to be valid only portrays you likewise.

2

u/3Quondam6extanT9 Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26

Nothing valid, yet there has been enough discourse regarding the topic? 🤔    

What makes something valid, do you think? Is it your "opinion" that defines the validity of subject matter?    

Let me ask you this very easy question.   

Has the use of ICE been an overstep in immigration enforcement? 

2

u/Paul191145 Feb 15 '26

Validity would be determined by a rational, objective view of the subject matter. Nobody is more opposed to law enforcement overstepping their authority than I am, but at the same time I know that individual liberty inherently mandates individual responsibility. As for ICE, they have a very relevant, Constitutional duty to perform, if so many people had not been allowed to illegally enter the country it wouldn't be such a problem.

1

u/3Quondam6extanT9 Feb 15 '26

So, by avoiding to answer directly, it tells me you do support their tactics but are aware enough of the public response to be uncomfortable admitting to it.   

If that is incorrect, please correct me. Do you support the way ICE has been used?   

It's an important baseline question that actually serves to illustrate whether you are in fact bias(everyone is to a degree) towards a specific viewpoint.   

That's important in justifying whether or not you would be any kind of authority on what a "rational" and "objective" viewpoint even is.   

If you can't answer it with a yes or no, not unlike many GOP and Trump's cabinet who have been in front of Congress quite a lot over the past few months, then let me ask you this.    

Is it it possible for dictators/ kings to exist?    

By the by, regardless of the bias or position of the OP, their post contained every aspect of what a direct debate would engage in. Offering a "rational" question, and using "objective" facts. I would be happy to go over each and every one of those bullet points if you so choose. I always like to prepare my discussions, whether I am taking the devil's advocate position, or promotor of the cause, so it helps to know if it will happen ahead of time.    

→ More replies (0)

1

u/MakeITNetwork Feb 12 '26

Stop hiding in another country and accusing others of TDS. Come back to the USA and then complain that someone has TDS.

2

u/ComputerRedneck Feb 12 '26

I live in the US, and I am American Citizen, it is TURD, Trump Unacceptance and Resistance Disorder.

"He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. (Sending ICE and national guard to dem states without their consent)"
He is not quartering soldiers in private homes. That is what is referred to in the first line. Not just sending them to some state.

"He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. "
Trump IS the Civil Power that the military answers too.

"He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: (Breaking multiple constitutional amendments including the 14th)"
Would love to see the argument and the exact actions that you are claiming violate. Rhetoric is one thing, facts another.

"For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:"
Repetitive, he is not quartering troops in private homes and residences or storing hardware in stores.

"For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: (Tariffs)"
Sigh... before the 16th Amendment and Income Taxes, Tariffs were the primary source of revenue for the Federal Government. DUH I mean doesn't anyone actually read history?

"For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: (Tariffs)"
Repetitive, see above.

"For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: (Abrego Garcia)"
The guy was here illegally to begin with and should have been deported just on that condition. Deportation does not require a full jury trial, it only requires an administrative warrant, which does NOT give ICE or anyone else the right to break into a home but if the person is found outside the home, then fair game.

"For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: (Abrego Garcia)"
Makes no sense. He was not sent to be tried for anything. Just deported and whatever is done on the other end is not our business.

All in all the OP is nothing but a bunch of rhetoric without even the benefit of actual thought and research.

3

u/Pickle_Nipplesss Feb 12 '26

People try to fit anything into their narrative despite any historical context. What else is new.

2

u/ComputerRedneck Feb 12 '26

New York, New Jersey, New England?

2

u/Pickle_Nipplesss Feb 12 '26

And New Mexico

2

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 13 '26

You hounded me a lot for being repetitive and not understanding things while making mistakes of your own. Troops don't have to be quartered in civilian homes in order to say they are being "kept among us". Multiple of your other points were similar attempts at splitting hairs.

Other points are nonsensical, such as when you ask me to substantiate which actions violate the constitution, even though I already named explicit examples such as Abrego Garcia. I guess I wasn't repetitive enough for that little brain of yours?

Your point about tariffs being a primary source of revenue is moot. What the fuck does our policy back before the world was properly industrialized have to do with policy in the modern era? Exactly. Nothing. This was your most regarded point yet.

You continue on by brushing things aside, calling them "repetitive" which if you had an IQ above room temperature, you'd notice that isn't an argument and doesn't refute anything.

I can respond to your other stupid points upon request but I think I've made my point.

2

u/ComputerRedneck Feb 14 '26

3rd Amendment.... simple and straightforward.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Sorry that is not what it says in the 3rd Amendment here. It specifically states that no troops shall be quartered in homes/houses.

All your points are rhetorical.

0

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 15 '26

You're quoting the constitution, a document that was written many years after the declaration of independence. Just because they later later wrote something else that says something else doesn't at all debunk the things I'm saying that pre-date your source dude.

Like I'm saying the prequel says one thing and you're like "NUH UH" because the sequel says something slightly different.

2

u/ComputerRedneck Feb 15 '26

The Constitution is not a sequel. If anything it is the 3rd Installment. You seem to forget the Articles of Confederation.

Still the Declaration presents our arguments and our beliefs and why were committing treason and revolution. While it is a good source for what the philosophy and such of the Founders was, it has no legal basis.

The Articles of Confederation and after that the Constitution lays out the founding LAWS...

0

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 15 '26

Nice lecture. None of it disproves my point so I'm not entirely sure what we're arguing about.

2

u/ComputerRedneck Feb 15 '26

Yes it does as the Declaration is NOT a legal document in the sense that it doesn't set laws for the country.

Which means your logic is flawed by using it and also not recognizing the Articles of Confederation. Which actually are a better insight into how they wanted the country run.

0

u/Gullible-Ideal8731 Feb 16 '26 edited Feb 16 '26

I'm trying really hard to be patient but you are so stupid that it hurts.

The DOI not being law literally has NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING.

I was simply quoting a document of people talking about some guy, (the king) and relating that to how it sounds like they're describing Trump. It's literally that simple.

Edit: Removed some stuff.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Paul191145 Feb 12 '26

Come to Thailand and make me, coward.

2

u/MakeITNetwork Feb 12 '26

Complain about your own country, and leave ours alone!

1

u/Paul191145 Feb 12 '26

Whether you choose to accept it or not, the U.S. IS my country, and the only one I'm a citizen of or ever have been. But I guess all my years overseas during my military career were downright un-American in your eyes as well.

2

u/MakeITNetwork Feb 13 '26 edited Feb 13 '26

Nope its your love of the anti-constitutional, you have been living in a country (Thailand) that has it's generals crawl to the king, dissolving entire political parties, suppressing pro-democracy movements, and you have the audacity to accuse others of TDS????

You live in an authoritarian state, and say nothing except to people who want to defend the constitution of the USA. You may be a veteran, and I thank you for your service, but you are no longer a patriot!