RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Borowitz writes: "Calling it 'maybe the worst deal ever,' Donald J. Trump said on Wednesday that he is considering pulling the United States out of the United States Constitution."

Donald Trump. (photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
Donald Trump. (photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Trump Considers Pulling US Out of Constitution

By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

12 May 18


The article below is satire. Andy Borowitz is an American comedian and New York Times-bestselling author who satirizes the news for his column, "The Borowitz Report."

alling it “maybe the worst deal ever,” Donald J. Trump said on Wednesday that he is considering pulling the United States out of the United States Constitution.

“I’ve seen a lot of bad deals in my life, but this Constitution is a total mess,” he said. “We need to tear it up and start over.”

Trump was scathing in his remarks about the two-hundred-and-twenty-nine-year-old document, singling out for special scorn its insistence on three branches of government. “The branches thing is maybe the worst part of this deal,” he said. “The first thing we do when we pull out of the Constitution is get rid of two of those branches.”

He also called the First Amendment “something that really has to go.”

“No one in his right mind would put something like that in a Constitution,” he said. “Russia doesn’t have it. North Korea doesn’t have it. All the best countries don’t have it.”

He stopped short of accusing his predecessor, Barack Obama, of writing the United States Constitution, but said, “He’s working hard behind the scenes trying to save it, because he knows that the Constitution is very, very bad for me.”

Vowing to replace the Constitution with “a new, much, much better Constitution,” he acknowledged that there might be some elements of the original document worth salvaging. “We’re going to keep the Second Amendment,” he said, “and definitely the Fifth.” your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+77 # Wise woman 2018-05-12 14:38
This just happens to be the most serious satire I have ever read. Andy is getting more and more realistic. It would not surprise me one bit if trump tried to pull this one off.
+10 # FIRSTNORN1 2018-05-13 05:57
Quoting Wise woman:
This just happens to be the most serious satire I have ever read. Andy is getting more and more realistic. It would not surprise me one bit if trump tried to pull this one off.

Wise woman, you could not be more correct; if DT thinks the Repubs might lose the House, he might even declare Martial Law to see if the military will actually help him impose it. After all, why bother with elections until we know with an absolute certainty that they will be Free and Fair. Any system which could elect Obama, must (by definition) by biased toward s---hole countries.
+9 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-05-12 16:43
This is really funny -- and so true. The constitution is in many ways just what Trump says, "the worst deal ever." The electoral college insures that a ruling elite will control who gets into the white house. The "3/5 rule" which allows southern states to count their slaves as "3/5th of a human being" meant that the aristocratic and slave holding south would control the centeral regime for the first 80 years of the nation's existence. And there are many other serious problems.
+9 # candida 2018-05-13 05:29
Quoting Rodion Raskolnikov:
.... The electoral college insures that a ruling elite will control who gets into the white house. The "3/5 rule" which allows southern states to count their slaves as "3/5th of a human being" ...

Interesting use of the present tense. However, the 3/5ths rule was nullified by the 14th Amendment at the end of the Civil War. I'll give it to you, RR, you are quite the sophisticated little tRRoll.
-3 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-05-14 08:59
can -- yes, sorry that was a mistake. Should have been "allowed."

And by the way, there's only one R in tRoll.
+1 # Jim at Dr.Democracy on Facebook 2018-05-15 13:10
"Meant" is past tense. "Would control...for the first 80 years" is about the past.

What is wrong with you people? Of course RR knows that. RR is one of the many erudite people regularly in this discussion area. I don't have to agree with everything RR writes to be able to recognize RR is often right on target and also that none of us is perfect... you know ... in the way that T-Rump thinks he is.

Let's try to keep our powder dry until we can see the whites of the eyes of our actual enemies.

The relevant historical and Constitutional point related to the Electoral College is that each state got and gets two Senators regardless of population, which then skewed and now still skews the Electoral College in favor of more rural, less cosmopolitan, more conservative states (in that time ALL the southern states except populous Virginia; now many southern states as well as Bible-beating states in the central part of the nation (KS, OK, NE, TX) and extraction states: ID, MT, ND, SD).

The big advantage the Rs have gained since Reagan in elections in state legislatures, governorships, and in the US House has resulted from a Blue Dog, Neoliberal, Conservative, Right-Wing takeover of the Democratic Party. The Ds will never gain control again so long as their strategy is to out-corporate-w hore the Rs.
+12 # BetaTheta 2018-05-13 10:38
All very true, but we sure as hell don't want Trump re-writing it. And we are perilously close to a threshold of Republican-domi nated states that are pushing for a constitutional convention.
A new constitution written by Republican legislators would be the effective end of any semblance of democracy.
+11 # HarryP 2018-05-13 11:49
Rodion: You got one thing right. Borowitz’s fictional Trump would like to declare the US Constitution as “the worst deal ever,” which you agree, is “so true.”

You then list the flaws in the Constitution: the Electoral Collage, the 3/5 Clause, “and many other serious problems.” Never mind that the 3/5 Clause hasn’t been part of the Constitution for 150 years. But never mind that. I’m more interested to see how Trump (and you presumably) would deal with the “other serious problems.”

Let me guess how the new governing document would look like: Well versed in the art of the deal, Trump would create a truly unitary presidency (for life and hereditary too boot; Jared and Ivanka have already discussed who would be next in line), without the pesky emoluments clause, without cumbersome checks and balances by two other independent branches, without an independent judiciary (with the powers of conducting independent counterintellig ence operations), without the first and eight amendments (seeing that press is the enemy of the people and that torture works), and the unilateral right to make laws (he’d have his money for The Wall in no time), treaties (the best ever, with Kim) and declare war (against the horrible mullahs.) And best of all, he’d get to arrest Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller.

That oughta do it. That’ll be the best deal ever.
+5 # Porfiry 2018-05-13 18:04
Hillary won by some 3,000,000 votes but the electoral college elected Trump. It's a typical Trump move: Punish those who work for you. Fire his most ardent supporters. Including the Constitution.
+6 # Porfiry 2018-05-14 11:05
Hillary won by 3,000,000 votes. The electoral college was used to elect Trump. Why should he complain about the Constitution?
0 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-05-15 13:34
Port -- actually, you have it right. The constitution protects him from Mueller's Probe, too. It is keeping him in office.
+54 # BetaTheta 2018-05-12 17:57
It's getting uncanny, how Borowitz can mimic the Trump style and diction!
+15 # boredlion 2018-05-12 22:30
Nicely put, Andy ! Because this is exactly what is happening.
+9 # Texas Aggie 2018-05-12 23:20
Read the article about what happened to the comic who made jokes about killing ICE agents. Andy can expect a knock on his door any time now. After all, Andy has lots of people who are following him and when he denigrates drumpf and all his bots, he is putting a target on his back.
+14 # NAVYVET 2018-05-13 07:19
The Unpresidented Drumpf's already pulled us out of the Bill of Rights and most of the Preamble, just as Obama ignored habeas corpus. But--sigh!--tha t was nothing new. So did Lincoln.

The Romans had a gimmick called "dictator", just as the Athenians used "tyrannos" (tyrant), but these were fixed for a very short time period in case there was need for extremely quick decisions. After that time period, they stepped down. In Greece it tended to get screwed up, but in law-obsessed Rome the temporary dictator thing, while very rare, worked smoothly for several HUNDRED years until--you guessed it--the time of Marius, Sulla and Julius Caesar, who (with Cato's help) wrecked the Republic.

The only guarantee of good government is an educated voting citizenry.
+3 # Jim at Dr.Democracy on Facebook 2018-05-15 13:14
Agreed. Education!

Of course, this is exactly why the Rs have been busy ruining our public education system for the past 40 years.

Regarding Habeus Corpus, it must be remembered that Lincoln faced a genuine existential threat to the United States.

Obama...did...not. What he faced was an opportunity to toe the corporate line.

And I was so excited when he first won. Sheesh.
-5 # Kootenay Coyote 2018-05-13 08:27
Didn’t ‘W’ Bush say it was just a piece of paper?
‘…there might be some elements of the original document worth salvaging.’
Not to mention restoring the original text about 1 black person = 3/5 white person.
+6 # Working Class 2018-05-13 10:30
Since Trump is ignoring the constitution he really has not need to pull out of it.
+5 # ericlipps 2018-05-14 05:02
he Unpresidented Drumpf's already pulled us out of the But that was nothing new. So did Lincoln.
And that will remain a stain on our sixteenth president's reputation forever (at least among those who know enough history to know it happened). But at least he did it on a presumably temporary basis in the midst of civil war. Trump wants to do it permanently for his own personal benefit.
+1 # Jim at Dr.Democracy on Facebook 2018-05-15 13:54
Not a stain at all. A necessary step and the correct step.

Regarding history, you may not know that even before Lincoln reached Washington DC after his victory in the Presidential election, there were plots to assassinate him before he took office and serious and large-scale organization for armed rebellion.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.