dChan
Anonymous ID: 02c44c Nov. 29, 2020, 6:28 p.m. No.11835735   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5875 >>5901 >>5914

>>11835658

And finally, we get to the dogs. Genghis Khan’s “miraculous army” included huge dogs that he took along on war expeditions. They were launched in charges against the ranks of the enemy, and used as dispatch carriers. Legend has it that two of these enormous dogs marched with every company of Genghis Khan’s army for the expressed purpose of being sentries, not attack dogs. These canines were the ancestors of the breed we know today as the Tibetan Mastiff.

 

One amazing legend about these dogs is that Genghis Khan once led thousands of Tibetan Mastiff “soldiers” to conquer Western Europe. The writer, Yang Zhijun, made specific mentions in his book “Tibetan Mastiffs” about the legend. “Genghis Khan’s ‘fierce dog troops’ included 50,000 soldiers which were all Tibetan Mastiffs. They would feed on the bodies of enemies, march invincibly, and performed exploits that deeply shocked and satisfied Genghis Khan.”

 

Who can say with certainty if this was true, but it’s more assured that the Tibetan Mastiff is believed to be one of the oldest breed of dog still living, and that it likely lent its DNA to other Mastiff breeds outside its native land, including the Mastiff, St. Bernard, and others.

 

None of us will ever be able to claim Genghis Khan as a BFF, but the next time you pet a Tibetan Mastiff, know that you are petting a living creature that’s the closest you’ll ever get to the Great Kahn.

Anonymous ID: 02c44c Nov. 29, 2020, 6:43 p.m. No.11835964   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>11835925

>>11835925

The act was amended on April 5, 1869, one month and one day after Republican President Ulysses S. Grant assumed the presidency. The revisions grew out of an attempt to completely repeal the 1867 act. The measure to repeal passed the House of Representatives with only 16 negative votes but failed in the Senate. The new provisions were significantly less onerous, allowing the President to suspend office holders "in his discretion" and designate replacements while the Senate was in recess, subject only to confirmation of the replacements at the next session. The President no longer had to report his reasons for suspension to the Senate, and the Senate could no longer force reinstatement of suspended office holders.[10]

 

Although Grant, in his first message to Congress, in December 1869, urged the repeal of even the revised act, it did not cause further problems until the election of Democrat Grover Cleveland in 1884. Under the spoils system it had long been accepted practice for the administration of a new party to replace current office holders with party faithful. Cleveland, a supporter of a civil service system, had promised, however, to avoid wholesale replacements, vowing to replace incumbents only for cause. When he suspended several hundred office holders for cause, Senate committees requested information from cabinet members regarding the reasons for the suspensions, which Cleveland refused to provide. If he had simply said that the incumbents were being replaced for political reasons, the Senate would have complied, but Cleveland would not do so. When, in early 1886, the Senate as a whole demanded information regarding the conduct of the suspended U.S. Attorney for southern Alabama, Cleveland sent a message to Congress explaining his position opposing impingement of independence of the executive. Cleveland's replacement nominee was eventually confirmed when it was discovered that the suspended incumbent's term had expired in the meantime anyway.[10] The Tenure of Office Act was finally repealed in 1887, 20 years after the law was enacted.

 

Constitutionality

In 1926, a similar law (though not dealing with Cabinet secretaries) was ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Myers v. United States, which affirmed the ability of the President to remove a Postmaster without Congressional approval. In reaching that decision, the Supreme Court stated in its majority opinion (though in dicta), "that the Tenure of Office Act of 1867, insofar as it attempted to prevent the President from removing executive officers who had been appointed by him by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, was invalid".[3]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure_of_Office_Act_(1867)