Release the Epstein files.
People should read up on the leadership conflict currently going on at the Library of Congress.
On May 8, 2025, two days after Hayden had given testimony to the Senate Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on House Administration,[80][81] via email and without any explanation, she was abruptly fired by President Trump … No replacement of Hayden has been nominated. Principal Deputy Librarian Robert Newlen,[86] who would have served as interim librarian was fired and Trump named Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche as acting librarian of Congress and later fired the deputy librarian and copyright office director (Perlmutter and Newlen), appointing senior DOJ officials Brian Nieves and Paul Perkins as respectively, for the interim. This has been interpreted as an attack on the separation of powers.[87] Perlmutter has sued to dispute the legality of the dismissal,[88] as the Register is appointed by, and responsible to, the Librarian of Congress.
So currently there are two conflicting acting directors of LOC. One, who is a lawyer, appointed by Trump, whom noone at LOC accepts, and one librarian, who does the actual day to day administration.
It is curious that the article doesn’t mention who is speaking for the LOC, they are just twitter messages by the LOC account. I bet that while the Trump sycophant has no power over any of the librarians in LOC, he is in control of the LOC twitter account and the website, with some external techbros doing his bidding, and that is all he has to play with, yet unsurprisingly enough still managed to turn everything into shit just with those slivers of control.
The actual staff of the LOC are just doing their library thing (their youtube channel has been very active lately with some knowledgeable and interesting stuff), while this piece of shit is busy doing his Trump shit.
How the fuck can Trump just fire anyone he pleases, yet when fucking Biden was in there it seemed he couldn’t even get rid of the fucking gardner???
Because they realize that rules are just words on paper. They mean precisely nothing when the people in charge of enforcing them are the ones who are breaking them.
Dems are all for following tradition. Oh sir you can only fire the gardener in the fifth Tuesday of a month. Vs Republicans who say fuck it.
We have been working to correct this and expect it to be resolved soon
Lol, this is a static site. A 5 minute change. Even if they have a process to run all changes through review and testing before deployment (which they don’t or else this kind of “coding error” wouldn’t have happened), this is fixed same-day. They’re lying.
review and testing
TBF, who would write a test to test whether or not parts of the fucking Constitution had been removed?
If it was run on like, GitHub Pages, you would do a rollback.
I have support for rollbacks in my site cause I have blue-green… I never use it, but I do have it!
Off by one error I could believe if the articles are displayed through an array and not a purely plain text in a div. Off by two error I think not.
Off by 2 and a half. It makes no sense.
“coder” (stupid person term for what I do) here: No, this wasn’t an accident.
Hear me out. They may have some shitty convoluted markup, and they wanted to make a change to make it “more maintainable” or some shit.
But it was so poorly laid out with no separation of html and CSS they needed to copy and paste it but by bit, and the junior they paid to do it wasn’t really paying attention and missed a chunk.
Possible.
Or, and I think more likely, someone used an AI agent to make some change and it deleted a whole lot of shit, nobody checked what changed and they “shipped lots of changes, they have the best changes”
I don’t think it was an amendment, so that part of the Constitution probably hasn’t changed in 200 years
Whoopsie, what a mistake to make.
This is just like all those times he ‘accidentally’ ;-);-) raped all the little children and then refused to release the Epstein list.Curious “coding error”. The only “coding error” I can see here is that they already prepared the site for future changes they plan, and just executed them early.
For those curious+lazy, the removed sections were “pertaining to Habeas Corpus and judicial review of unlawful detention”.
And more, like the bit about no Ex Post Facto laws, emoluments, and titles.
and the entire US Navy
Awfully specific sections that didn’t load.
2 removals and an edit, all 3 pertaining to things Trump’s trying to bully his way into existence. Complete accident though.
Oh, they’re still missing hours later? That’s weird…
Devil’s advocate, but depending on how the page is laid out in the code, it could be that the entirety of Article 1 is a section, so if a mistake was made at some point in the section it would affect the rest of it.
Considering they fired all of the competent people, it’s within the realm of possibility that it was a fuck up. Shit, they might have just copy and pasted whatever chatgpt spit out.
But if it was really a coding error, all they’d have to do is provide the merge request.
Fuck you and your devil’s advocate the results are what matter and the results are what we’re planned, get your head out of your fucking ass
Nah I’m blaming AI for this one too.
But why is AI fucking with the constitution at all? Dunno
But why is AI fucking with the constitution at all? Dunno
This. All of these hypotheticals and excuses people are making are missing/ignoring 1 simple detail:
Why were they editing The Constitution to begin with?
It only changes through acts of Congress and requires a super-majority. So why were they editing it?
@onslaught545 - Seriously? You’re going the “code layout” route? Even a syntax error wouldn’t leave the rest of Section 8 unaffected while removing the hundreds of pages after it. Seriously, look at the site’s structure, each section has hundreds of pages. This isn’t a fluke.
Because it’s a legal version with annotations, and considering all of the court cases surrounding the section recently, it makes sense to update it.
“We swear that our top developer, Chat GPT fixed the issue.”
More likely Grok.
Was it praising Hitler or drawing nude pictures of Taylor Swift?
It was drawing nude pictures of Hitler.
Grok is capable of many of things. It can pronounce to everyone that it is the next mecha-Hitler and create nude deep fakes of Taylor Swift.
This came up in the thread last night. Why would you dynamically load content that, practically, never changes?
It ACTUALLY never changes. Even if it’s Amended, the Amendment is an addition, nothing gets removed.
See: Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3:
“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.”
That’s what the s html element is for:
<s>strikethrough</s>strikethrough(not to be confused with
/sfor sarcasm)Still waiting on that tag to be canonical
<sarcasm>sorry not sorry</sarcasm>The default CSS style should do a text transform to:
sOrRY NoT sorrY
AbsoFUKANlutely
That and using # for Trump headers like so:
TRUMP ISN’T RACIST, YOU’RE RACIST!
So hot right now.
you can also use markdown to strikethrough by putting two swintons on each sideswintons
Ha! That took me a little longer than I care to admit, but I actually lol’d.
It’s annotated, so it’s possible that the annotations could change.
Annotations could be a separate call based on a simple section tag with an id, very compatible.
So brown people can be detained and deported easier. Duh.
because this is an annotated version of the constitution with legal analyses. those texts need to be updated occasionally with new case law.
It’s almost like the base document can be loaded without annotations and never change. Then have the annotations load separately on top of the base page preventing even this odd “could be a tech issue” problem.
Don’t accept their blaming tech for it. There is no reason that those annotations should even have been updated at this particular point anyway.
I mean, there’s been court cases pertaining to those sections recently.
I said nothing about accepting tech problems or assigning blame. it’s simply a sensible design for a website that is occasionally updated to use dynamically loaded elements.
If the tech issue is real, it’s because they were changing these annotations to basically the same effect, downplaying or deleting these sections of the constitution. (Not currently capitalized.)
Because not all documents are immutable and it doesn’t make sense to have a one off system. It is the same reason that most websites use the same CMS system for the “about us” page that might change one every two years as well as every single article and calendar.
But also… having an immutable document also feels like one of the best unit/sniff tests you can have.
This came up in the thread last night. Why would you dynamically load content that, practically, never changes?
I would not be surprised if some 20 year old “vibe coder” touched it, since they don’t know shit about computers they made bad choices.
Yes, the correct way to display a short simple document like this is plain html with bog-standard structure and indexing/metatext markup plus device and accessibility targeted css. That is it. Any scripts or references should fail fully gracefully back to web 1.0.
MAGA is, of course, telling everyone to calm down, because it’s a “coding error”.
MAGA, of course, has no critical thinking skills, and so doesn’t question why a static document was being edited so specifically in the first place.
Shit this is the justification they need to be angry about it. “The crooked media and the dirty liberals forced me to put a bunch of stuff in the constitution that I don’t want there,” Trump will say on Truth Social, and by the next morning, reality will reflect that the Dems had to back down on the issue and, in fact, the changes Trump made are permanent.
It’s sad that they think editing some html will in some way further their agenda to ignore the actual document.
And it’s sad that they might be right.
They’re just trying to make it harder to look up your rights. If they were actually trying to erase these sections there would be lawsuits or bills going through congress. Not saying that they aren’t going to do that, just that this particular instance is more trying to withhold information.
This just gave me an idea, every website, blog, ect. should post a full text copy of the constitution. Hell I have a blog I don’t post on that much, I might do this after work.
Turns out, all the Republican “constitutionalists” ever meant was that they wanted to be able to yell slurs and kill brown people with impunity. They just had to hide it behind noble-sounding language until the right Nazis were in power.
Are they trying to pull an Animal Farm on the constitution?
Literally.
“No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?”
