> so clearly lawyers have had no trouble breaking it. You are missing the point. The point is comparing it to a hypothetical constitution that is 20 pages lo

> so clearly lawyers have had no trouble breaking it. You are missing the point. The point is comparing it to a hypothetical constitution that is 20 pages long, instead of 1 page long. So, the 20 page long constitution, is probably easier to break, despite you misleading focus, on the irrelevant point, of the exact way the statement was phrased.