(02-14-2019, 10:59 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(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.

The pots of money to be used are essentially overflows from four specific accounts totaling about $9B. It would not intefere with normal appropriations. As far as box being open, there are currently 31 active National Emergencies that reach back as far as the 1970’s. The precedence has already been set. Whether I agree or not with what Trump wants to do, it’s legal and constitutional. The Pelosi bit is just idiocy and would be an unconstitutional powder keg.

After reading the text of this new bill, barriers aren’t going to matter. Amnesty has been provided. Anyone can just declare at the port of entry. If not, they’ll be bused to nearest one. It really is quite ridiculous and the dollar figure to encourage, support and sustain the flow is scary. There is no way I’d sign this bill!

---

(02-14-2019, 11:00 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote:

(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?

This is why I hate both political parties. Trump is abusing his power by declaring a national emergency where there isn't one, so Pelosi threatens to do something equally as stupid, if a Democratic president gets in. Both sides are acting like spoiled children.

It is beyond stupid. Unfortunately, with each attempt at a funding bill it has become more idiotic. This new one makes California legislation look grand! Trump has the right to secure the border threw a National Emergency whether that is the best method or not but if this bill gets signed it won’t matter. They’ve traded one issue for a bigger one.

---