(02-14-2019, 08:47 PM)B2hibry Wrote: https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com...guns%3famp

Pelosi warns that a Dem President could declare a National Emergency because of gun violence. In my opinion, this is an apples and oranges comparison to the current situation. Even so, what action is she proposing take place if a National Emergency were declared for such a reason? That has the potential to be one of the largest misteps in history if I’m being honest. Say you?

It looks like Trump will just use money that Congress intended for one thing to build a wall instead.
A future Democratic party president could do something similar, like refuse to buy as many fighter jets and use that money for something else that he or she cared about.
But how much money? And how different would the two things be? There is no logical stopping point once the box is opened.
Taking people's guns away, or stopping sale of guns, that doesn't sound similar or likely to me, simply because that is a lot more than just moving money around.
But at a more basic level, Pelosi's message is that Republicans should be very scared of the consequences of Trump doing this. And I think she's right about that, at least.

---