The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
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:
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:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Georgia
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton
North Carolina
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton
Maryland
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
Pennsylvania
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean
New York
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
New Hampshire
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
John Hancock
Rhode Island
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire
Matthew Thornton
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript
Even half those reasons would have been enough to declare our independence.
And yet you support your “king” imposing them on the nation today. Interesting how you agree with the founder’s grievances, but are okay with them today.
I am an American–I have no king.
And yet you’re fine with your “king” grifting, raping, molesting of children, shredding the Constitution and basically doing what bad kings do. Or at least you ignore or rationalize his behavior.
Again, I do not have a king so I have no idea what you are droning on about.
You’re just another example of a tool. Pretending to not be something when all your actions show otherwise.
Even tho you have a propensity to avoid answering direct questions, I will ask anyhow: Do you believe the president is above the law? If so, where in the Constitution does it suggest as much? And if not, do you believe this president has acted outside the law?
Try not to answer using a right winger sycophant’s answer as you did with the election question. Questions 1 & 3 need only a yes or a no response. I will repeat this direction as you have shown to be incapable of following simple basic instructions: Questions 1 & 3 need only a yes or a no response. The second requires effort to provide, to which providing irrefutable proof is your kryptonite (ex: TR outdoor boxing ring).
keep it civil please
Ray? Be serious.
Definition of someone being called a tool:
Calling someone a “tool” is a derogatory insult implying the person is being manipulated by others, is acting foolishly, or lacks independent thought. It suggests they are an instrument used to do someone else’s bidding.
Perhaps uncivil, but true nonetheless.
No one is above the law. Whether they are charged is another thing–and since you like to go off-topic, I have in mind that Hillary Clinton had e-mails that she was required to hold on to by court order–but deleted them, thus breaking the law. But Trump decided not to press charges.
As the Supreme Court ruled, doing official Presidential activities is not illegal.
And when did I ever say that the US had a king in the last about 250 years?
I am serious. And just as I thought, you didn’t answer as requested, but rather with the standard right wing response that avoids the issue the question directly addresses. The question was not about everyone else, it was about the president. What’s the distinction? It has been shown that some do not view the president as one of the people, so in effect, because of the mindset of the delusional, an answer to the specific subject is required. Plus you didn’t answer the most important question. The one that will certify one’s character, or lack thereof.
“do you believe this president has acted outside the law?”
What’s your fear of answering this and then backing it up with a reliable source?
Stop with the bullshit excuse of being charged. Again, if charging is your only definition of actual crime, then murder is not a crime as long as one doesn’t get caught. The crime is the action, a verb. The criminal is the suspect, the noun.
The police don’t stand over a dead body with multiple bullet wounds and say, “No crime here because we have nobody to charge.”
My question addresses the action of a crime. In other words: Have his actions been lawful? Maybe besides internet literacy courses, you may want to sign up for some ESL classes to get a grasp of the language.
As for on topic, you said half of the original grievances were reason enough, to which I presented a video that shows what Mango Mussolini is doing today that was not much different back in 1776. Yet, you have yet to disagree with the actions of your “king”. (notice the quotes I use on the word. It’s not a literal king but rather one who acts like one. Again, take an ESL class or at least something that gets you to understand grammer.)
And spare me this Clinton’s email line, that both sides crap doesn’t hold water. She was investigated, not once, but twice and nothing was found. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31806907
The whole thing was legal from the get go. Congress changed the law after the fact. Trump didn’t charge her, because there wasn’t anything to charge her with. He just played to the morons who don’t live in reality.
And stop deflecting. Like the politician who never answers a direct question, it makes them look guilty. Or maybe you just are guilty.
You argue like an overcaffeinated 13 year-old.
I didn’t waste my time and watch that video–and how does that relate to my initial comment on our grievances with King George II? And I don’t care how you want to define “king.”
Of course you didn’t because it would prove me correct and you cannot deal with facts that disrupt your ignorant worldview.
As for your 13-year-old comment that puts me 9 years ahead of you.
“how does that relate to my initial comment on our grievances with King George II?”
This why I call you willfully ignorant and illiterate. I specifically stated the reason. You chose to not connect the obvious dots and continue to deflect due to your extreme ignorance. You lack any capacity of honest debate mostly because you can’t honestly admit you’re lazy in learning and are too weak to admit to the truth.
“As the Supreme Court ruled, doing official Presidential activities is not illegal.”
The Emoluments Clauses strictly prohibits any person holding an “Office of Profit or Trust” under the United States from accepting any “present, Emolument, Office, or Title” from any king, prince, or foreign state without the explicit consent of Congress. Now, I know he used a work around the Quatari plane by saying it was a gift to the Air Force, but he has already stated he’s keeping it after he leaves office.
Is this truly a non-issue to you? No impropriety whatsoever?
What about his ongoing ownership and financial interest in his business empire allowing him to unlawfully accept benefits from foreign and domestic governments without the required consent of Congress? In what context are these presidential acts?
Is it okay to leverage his office for massive personal enrichment? Because that’s what kings do. Hence we had the Boston Tea Party. Because if you’re fine with his actions, then you have to admit you disagree with the motives behind the Boston incident and by extension, the entire American Revolution. You can’t have it both ways, although you think you can.
You do realize there are a few former Air Force One’s at other presidential libraries?
The person you can’t name lost money during his first term. What proof do you have that he is making money in this term? He is already a billionaire and donates all but a dollar of his annual salary. And if he is making money, how does it compare to other presidents making money during their terms?
Those planes weren’t gifts, SimpleTim. I already provided about a dozen links showing him making money in a previous post as well as HCR having an essay about it. It’s not my fault you lack reading skills or are willfully ignorant.
“The person you can’t name lost money during his first term.”
A Bloomberg report attributed the drop in the pedo’s wealth to the COVID-19 pandemic, which had an impact on the wealth he was making from his office buildings, hotels and resorts.
In addition, after the January 6 Capitol attack in 2021, The pedo’s rapport with brokers and lenders was damaged and he faced $590 million in loans to cover
“What proof do you have that he is making money in this term? ”
Read his annual federal financial disclosure form—which spanned over 900 pages for the previous reporting year and you might get an idea. Although, there’s no drawings in there to use your crayons on, so you won’t waste your time.
“how does it compare to other presidents making money during their terms?”
Besides their presidential salaries. Nothing to not much.
You disagree, prove me wrong. And remember your own criteria: DURING their terms.
Which you won’t because lazy stupidity.
but you certainly seem to support someone with high aspirations. Just sayin’
Not sure what you mean. I know people that have aspirations to do better or move up the corporate ladder; why not support them?
because the one aspiring to be king is doing so at OUR expense
It’s about damn time you figured that out