The regime silently removed parts of the US Constitution like the writ of habaes corpus from the official website

You people really need to use that 2nd amendment

What's going on right now is actually a fantastic example of why this whole "people can have guns to overthrow a tyrant!" has been nothing more than a delusion used to justify having a gun fetish. It's 2025. Your gun will do absolutely nothing against the literal trillion dollars of annual spending you've approved for your own military and intelligence agencies.
- I think it would make a difference. You saw how fast Elon started using his kid as a shield and others basically stayed off the streets after UH CEO got lit up. They'd be VERY scared if an unknown person started knocking them off, maybe 1 a month for a year, I think it'd send a VERY clear message. Especially if it's released why they got popped. Behavior would change quick.
  The only reason we have shitty people make terrible, illegal decisions right now is because no one is holding them accountable. A .308 round would change that shit quick fast in a hurry.
- Most American gun owners would probably get assigned dish duty in the Mujahideen, but there’s multiple precedents for effectively countering a military like the US, as hard and brutal and costly as it is.
- That trillion dollars is designed to fight conventional armies and extremist Islamist terrorist cells in Africa and the Middle East. Our military apparatus is simply not capable of stopping any single individual, or small group(s), from randomly deciding to crash out. Unless the NSA/CIA/FBI/WTF/BBQ suddenly gain the power to read every person's mind, there's not a thing wealthy sociopaths can do to effectively wield the military against citizens in a way that makes it safe for those same sociopaths to walk down the street.
- US vs Russia or China. We'd have a solid shot of winning. Or we would have. Before drones became as common as bullets on the battlefield. But if the last 25 years have taught us anything it's that for all our advanced hi-tech expensive bullshit we still can't fight an insurgency. And insurgents in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. They were running around with ancient soviet era relics.
  If you subscribe to the 3.5% rule then we've met that threshold. They showed up at NoKings. Just needs a spark.
- Right? How is an AR-15 going to save anyone against a drone strike? The target doesn't even hear anything, one moment they're alive and the next they're not. Doesn't even have to be an explosive, like a firearm isn't going stop the government.
My concern is that if we were to exercise our 2nd amendment rights to eliminate this totalitarian regime and then install a proper democratically-elected progressive administration, what’s to stop the Fox News types from riling up the MAGA masses into “taking back” the government and eliminating our new regime? Violence begets violence. There has to be a better way.
- This isn't an argument you can win. People have spent too much time watching romanticized war movies and documentaries and don't understand what the personal cost of this would be. It sounds nice and all "rah rah rah let's get them" but this would to MILLIONS dying and elites still maintaining control in the end.
- The 5,56 7,62 or 9mm you will have express sent through their heads
The ones that cry the hardest about their second amendment are the ones that voted for this. The ones that want tyranny, because being tyrannical is OK so long as it's against those whiney losers you oppose.
The ones that want the second amendment are the ones that are so uintelligent and insecure that they need to buy a gun, or multiple guns.
- Shit like this makes me hate the past 5 years of Canadian liberalism that banned almost all semi-auto rifles and froze the handgun registery (meaning no new handguns may be purchased).
The only thing keeping most from going postal is having to support a family.
They do, but only to shoot each other not problem makers.
Would you be saying this if orange man wasn't in office?
If not, then you're part of the problem.
- Huh? "I want to overthrow a tyrannical president" would have been an important thing to say when there was no tyrannical president?
  Why?

Habeas corpus was a fundamental right in English speaking countries going back to the Magna fucking Carta. It is incredible how fast everything is falling apart.

Imagine the time saved! Those court backlogs will be gone in no time! /s

Trump is doing anything to keep everyone from talking about Epstein.

It's working fuck this news.

Other way around. They're using Epstein to distract everyone from everything they're doing.
- Seriously. How much has the mainstream corporate media covered our newly minted gestapo that's better funded than most militaries? Or gee idk, maybe followed the money? Ohh, it's going into their boss's pocket and they aren't allowed to talk about it?
Everything is a distraction from everything else. Almost all of it actually is fucking important, so even if it's distracting from Epstein, it's still a major fucking concern

and Americans once again will bravely

sit down and take it

It's not like removing the online copy removes the law. This is all just smoke and mirrors trying to distract from Trump's involvement with Epstien's child rape business.
- Electing the fascist removed the law.

Looks like the removed sections are back. Odd...

Remember folks. Fascism has never, ever been put down using words.

Arm yourselves. Help others arm themselves. Train with them and form networks.

As an European, I want Americans to fight against fascism, at the same time, it sounds like it would require civil war, and if that happens, then the sharks circling around US would use that opportunity to make some moves. This whole thing makes me uneasy. Y'all need to be smart about this.
- It truly truly truly is not far off. We are headed there.
- The US needs to divorce itself. Cut off the cancer and wall it off.
- Y’all need to be smart about this.
  That boat sailed in the November 2024 election. Now it is all about prepping, planning and survival.
In Francoist Spain the dictatorship collapsed with the death of Franco and while a violent few years ensued, the Spanish Transition to Democracy was (comparatively) peaceful.
Political strength and popular support were far more important than strength in violence.
- Moreover, a violent revolution was never achieved without the attendant political and logistical organization. So regardless of eventual character, the method of building a movement remains the same. Unfortunately it's boring, difficult work that leaves the most active most vulnerable to reprisals. Which is why people like Fred Hampton and Harvey Milk and Berta Cáceres are all so important and also ended up with their brains splattered on their beds/office floors etc.
Dont forget to buy lots of ammo. Guns dont do much without ammo.
- Organization is far more important. If the real shit pops off there will be plenty of ammo and guns laying on the ground. Logistics, secure communication, and strong, decentralized organization is vastly more important, and also what is lacking. If there was a real resistance, that's what they would be doing right now.
- If you've got a gun you've always got at least one shot in it (throwing the gun at the target)!
I have never understood how some think that people with guns can withstand the largest armed forces on the planet.
- Yeah, that's why there's no more Taliban. Or ISIS. Or Hamas. Or ...
- Time to check out a history book or two. With that attitude, US would still be a colony of Britain. Or the US would've won in Vietnam instead of getting kicked out by the locals. Granted, it is a bit different without an ocean in between, but it could still happen. Or we could break up like what happened to the USSR.
- The purpose of an armed resistance isn't a direct confrontation with an armed force. It's the death of a thousand logistical cuts. It's bleeding the country's economy dry by disrupting the commerce required to keep daily life running smoothly and crippling the regime's forces by making people afraid to sign up - one way or another. Whether that's neighborhoods chasing ICE out or people finding out where cops and soldiers live and "paying them a visit" in the dead of night. An armed resistance's goal is to simply be too big of a thorn to ignore but too entrenched and evasive to be worth the amount of money and effort it would take to catch them. Even just their existence in the media is a form of warfare. By simply being in the news they show a population that the regime can be resisted, even by just a bunch of people with guns.
  Look at Napoleon's war in Russia in 1812 and his massive losses due to poor supply lines, disease, and the Russians scorched earth policy ahead of the fierce Russian winter. Or to the American Revolution, where a bunch of farmers with guns and the financial backing of France became such a thorn in the side of the British Empire that they became one of the most powerful and obnoxious countries of the past two centuries and are the subject that started this whole conversation.
  You can turn your guns on the entire country's population, but then what? You're going to have a hard time keeping troops loyal when it's their friends and family on the other side of the gun, and terrorizing the population like that will make it impossible to keep the propaganda machine going. You'd be forced to rule through direct oppression, which would breed more resentment and more people willing to pick up a gun and fight back. Your only hope is to convince the discontent population that opposition is pointless and the true believers that you are right.
- Why don't you ask those guys in Vietnam about that? Or Afghanistan, for that matter.
- Vietnam
- The largest armed forces had hospitals been very bad with dealing with insurgency. It can crush a national military in days. An armed populace is just a quagmire it has little ability to deal with
- Same way people with guns stood against us for like 20 years.

From George Orwell's Animal Farm:

"My sight is failing," [Clover] said finally. "Even when I was young I could not have read what was written there. But it appears to me that that wall looks different. Are the Seven Commandments the same as they used to be, Benjamin?"

For once Benjamin consented to break his rule, and he read out to her what was written on the wall. There was nothing there now except a single Commandment. It ran:

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS

Damn that hits so close to home now.
- wow almost as if the very obvious story about authoritarianism accurately described authoritarianism. who could have known?

For all you youngn’s, even if parts of the US constitution is removed from the random government entity’s website—it’s still available in many MANY forms. So like. Don’t think this means anything other than making things about as hard to access as they were like 15 years ago (which is to say not that hard).

Just cause a government website doesn’t have some information does not mean that laws have or have not changed.

Please explain any reason why the parts that the regime in the US specifically detests and have stated multiple times are not true would be removed due to a "data issue".
Please explain how one can request a court apperance after being dissapeared by a paramilitary group with alegence to the regime that's better funded than the Russian millitary, when the library of Congress does not have a section on due process.
Please explain when the president declares that the country is being invaded and anyone he deems subversive is now labeled a terrorist enemy of the state, how one can request their rights when the parts of the Constitution no longer say that only Congress has the power to say the country is being invaded?
This is not just some random government site. This is the library of Congress. This is the first result of the word "Constitution" on every major internet search engine.
This is not a slippery slope, this is a drop into a camouflaged pitfall onto sharpened stakes covered in shit.
This was a test to see if we would notice, if we would care or be indifferent, if we would speak up.
I doubt there will be a formal explanation or investigation that will explain any of this to any degree out side of "opps, it was just a technical error" as if it could be an honest mistake to delete specific parts of a document which never has anything ever removed from it, only ever amended.
- those people will always call everyone alarmists and doomsayers, until they can't because the last of their freedom laws have been quietly removed. The Nazi party in Germany didn't start roaring and revolting, it started as a fed up minority that kept screaming so loud until everyone believed they were the majority. Stand up, fight for your and your neighbours freedoms and dont give those rightwing populists even an inch
- I don’t disagree.
- I think it's more likely a test for the remaining, formerly Republican but essentially democracy-minded constitution worshipping government employees, military personnel etc. to see who speaks up (or at all) about it. For example if a mid level general starts making noise in a channel that Trump's minions have access to, saying they don't like what's going on and someone should do something and if they don't maybe I will- boom, loyalty tested. Similar with media talking heads etc. it's easy to assume these people are stupid or careless - they often act that way, and in some ways fundamentally are. But I doubt this was anything other than deliberate bait. You have to ask yourself, for whom? Why? Why now?
The older I get, the more I realize the slippery slope fallacy isn't a fallacy at all.
You shouldn't be so confident in your 'wisdom' if you're older than most of us and you haven't reached that conclusion yet.
This isn't about making it harder to access your rights. It's signalling what rights you've lost. Who can advocate for your freedoms when the highest courts follow this new doctrine?
With the Cheeto I would not be too sure
Wonder what that might do for LLMs though. Maybe good to keep reposting the complete version?

They're not deleting it to say it doesn't exist, they're deleting it to prevent people from looking up their rights.

Can you explain the difference between? I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make.
- A lot of people I've seen online are acting like this is them trying to erase it completely. If they wanted to they wouldn't just change a website. I'm not saying that they won't, just that this is more about the suppression of information and that people should probably look this kinda shit up before it's gone. Get yourself a copy of the constitution in one of those neat little books your teachers always had if need be.
  All I'm saying is that people are acting like changing a website changes the laws of the US. And I think that we should all brush up on our rights before the resources online become unreliable. That way when they try and break the law you can say it loudly that what they are doing is illegal and call them out in front of everyone. The justice system has always been notorious for punishing those that don't know their rights. It's why they literally had to force cops to tell you your rights when they arrest you, which they are currently not doing. Protect yourself because nobody in the system will have your interests in mind.
- It's the difference between actively telling people "you do not have this right!" and quietly twiddling your thumbs and shrugging as people look for the information.

Ironic, since the writ of Habeas corpus predates even the Magna Carta.

Habeas corpus goes back to around 1166, which for those keeping track, is only around 600 years before the founding of the USA…

The US was founded on ostensibly three major legal ideas.
Habeus Corpus.
Due Process.
The Magna Carta.
We don't seem to currently have any of the three.
- And the Santa Maria.
- So the we don't have a country or laws. The Nazis don't get to decide who is bound by the law...it's either all of us or none of us.... currently it's none
I find it so strange how proud Americans are of their constitution, which was copied largely from British laws; who kinda shat on this part of their history…
- Most americans think any country outside america is like going back in time 100 years, so they are proud of the dumbest shit.
The idea of habeas corpus was around long before 1166. We know other much older civilizations had courts and the right to a confront ones accusers.
its not like these magats or trump know what these 2 mean anyways.
- Hábeas Corpus is the song from The Lion King right? /s

This won’t make me forget about Epstein, dumbass.

You can remember it until your great grand children visit the moon. Ain't one shit going to happen to Trump and friends. Congress is the only power that can do something and we all know that story. That lying orange clown lead a violent coup attempt on the United States government and nothing happened to him. Why would this Epstein thing even matter?
- finally, someone who gets it.

What a time to be alive.

They're making up the law as they need it. Trump is history. He's the ultimate loser. He's a convicted felon and an unregistered sex offender.

How long after all this is done will I be able to sit down and watch the documentary without PTSD flashbacks?
- Bold of you to assume this could be over in your lifetime.
- It never ends.

Land of the Free.

Whoever told you that is your enemy.
- They keep singing it during their anthem, as though they believe it.
They're certainly not getting paid.
Land of the free, home of the slave.

Well if this isn't a reason to use your second amendment what the fuck is

I personally think we should've have been reclaiming the wealth stolen from the working class by force.
It's not surprising that people like you have been duped into thinking 'now' is the time when it's been time for awhile. It just shows me how disconnected you are from reality and the actual problems we face.
None of you want to take the fight to the rich people because you all want to be the rich people or have been suckered into believing that we should be grateful for them.
Hm, where did it go? I imagine this will also happen in my home country next election. GREAT!
- What is you home country? Most of the rest of the world doesn't actually have anything like the second amendment.

America doesn't just have a constitution. It is created by the Constitution. They are deleting America and patriots are cheering it on.

It would have been nice if we had all grown up pledging allegiance to the Constitution instead of to the fucking flag. I mean, soldiers and politicians all have to swear an oath to the Constitution - why do we consider a piece of fabric (that hasn't even stayed the same throughout the history of our country) so much more important?
- A while back I made a collection of all the oaths taken by federal officials, employees, military etc. Each and every one tells them that the Constitution is their guide and it is their duty to protect/defend/support it.
  Here they are:
  These are each of the oaths that different government servants are required to take when assuming office. Each one requires the person to either support and defend the Constitution or to follow Constitution.
  When you see a Congress member surrender their responsibilities to the president or the president say he isn't going to honor a court order you are seeing them violate their oath. That is how nations fail. When the people that are charged with creating or enforcing the laws don't do so then laws don't exist or are selectively enforced as a weapon instead of a tool of protecting the rights of others.
  Enlisted: "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
  Officers: "I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the _____ (Military Branch) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."
  President: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
  Congress: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
  Judges: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
  Civil servants: “I, ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
The Declaration of Independence is what created the country. The Articles of Confederation where the first attempt at a Constitution, but failed. It wasn't until 1787 (i.e. 11 years later) that the current Constitution was ratified.
- The declaration severed ties with Britain and the king. It did not create the United States. It did create 13 separate nation States though. The United States of America was not accomplished until the Constitution which was more than a decade later.

So where are the brave gun owning defenders of freedom and liberty I keep hearing so much about?

most of those nutjobs believe in the segragating ideology of the trump regime, they WANT to see others be put down for "exploiting" them and their wallets
They are the ones telling you to get a gun yourself. They expect you to do it for them.

Somebody needs to do it. The entire executive branch.

https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/06/key-sections-of-the-us-constitution-deleted-from-governments-website/

"No corpus, no crime-o."

I 100% hope so and would rather put my energy into that outcome

This doesn't appear to be true. The website still shows the full constitution. It's more likely someone has meddled with the archive.

If this wasn't true, then why did the library of Congress have a banner on its site stating
The Constitution Annotated website is currently experiencing data issues. We are working to resolve this issue and regret the inconvenience.
I'm not sure how you think someone "meddled" with the internet archive or what your source is but the smallest bit of research will bring you to reputable news outlets saying this happened.
https://www.axios.com/2025/08/06/constitution-missing-sections-coding-error
https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/06/key-sections-of-the-us-constitution-deleted-from-governments-website/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/constitution-sections-missing/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/constitution-removed-congress-website-restored-b2803241.html
I think you are missing the part where the library of Congress simply added the sections back when people noticed it was gone.
- What the hell is a "data issue"
The internet is frustrating.
- I encourage you to read the comment right above yours; the website really altered the constitution.

Sorry Americans, it's getting really hard to be sympathetic towards those of you who claim to be opposed to this shit show.

Your inaction is enabling this behaviour.

People are being rounded up and sent to concentration camps. It's real easy to play armchair game theorist here, but in order to properly fight back people need safe places to retreat to who will defend you from being kidnapped or outright executed.
There's plenty of people rebelling btw.
What would you suggest be done?
- I think you should complain about it online, "follow" protest groups on Facebook, wear edgy shirts about genocide. Maybe even post some both sides memes just to spice things up.

The LoC annotated constitution website is not connected to the executive branch and not a source of record.

The regime is more than the executive branch.
And yet it still came up as the first search result. It takes some serious mental gymnastics to think this is normal or ok.
- It's not "ok", it's an obvious mistake. I only emphasize the context because people are acting like, even if this was intentional, that it has any effect.
Sure, but it's still symbolically very important