• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Pelosi threatens 2A with Emergency in next Dem presidency

There is a big difference declaring a national emergency to stop invasions on the southern border, and declaring a national emergency to confiscate citizen's legally owned private property.
Yeah, because one is confiscating private property when there is no actual emergency, and the other is... sorry, what were you saying?
 
Are we talking about the same people? By now, George Washington would have snuck over in the dead of night to kill all the traitors, while on holiday no doubt. Defending your people from foreigners is a national emergency.
Apparently we're not. George knew that immigrants aren't "traitors", for one thing. He also welcomed foreigners -- that was one of the grievances in the Declaration of Independence. King George restricted immigration, and that was a good reason to rebel.
 
Try as I may I cannot find a constitutional right afforded to foreigners to emigrate into this country.
Try as I might, I cannot find where our rights are granted to us by government. I also cannot find where the Constitution grants to the federal government any right to restrict or control immigration.

"Naturalization", yes; immigration, no.
 
She’s an idiot but she’s making a point that many people, including Republican are making. If Trump were to declare an emergency to build a wall because illegals are dangerous then what would stop a D President from declaring an emergency because “guns” are dangerous?

I was against Obama's 'phone and a pen', I'm technically against Trump's 'emergency', but dammit, if the opposition is going to fight in the mud, it's best to get muddy and enjoy it. Otherwise, you can't grab them, but they can grab you.
 
Try as I might, I cannot find where our rights are granted to us by government. I also cannot find where the Constitution grants to the federal government any right to restrict or control immigration.

"Naturalization", yes; immigration, no.

Immigration and Naturalization were pushed to the federal level in the early 1800's. I've been drinking or I'd post it yet again here.
 
Ok lets say there is a national emergency on guns. How will it be enforced? You're going to send every cop to everyones house? And everyone will comply with no retaliation?
Ruby Ridge? Many times over. Weaver and his family had basic guns. Other preppers are much better armed
 
I was against Obama's 'phone and a pen', I'm technically against Trump's 'emergency', but dammit, if the opposition is going to fight in the mud, it's best to get muddy and enjoy it. Otherwise, you can't grab them, but they can grab you.

Queensbury rules are nice but only if both parties stick to it.
The Republicans are God awful slow to get that fact.
 
It kind of fits here - don't think I should start a new thread.

So the Funding Bill that Trump signed has a caveat that you can't use tax money to seek, detain, or house unaccompanied minors, anyone taking care of unaccompanied minors, anyone in the same household as an unaccompanied minor or anyone that may take care of an unaccompanied minor (think babysitting).

How about this:
"No tax money shall be used to enforce any local or federal firearms law or regulation on a legal United States Citizen. This applies to all previous and future laws enacted."

How about we give CITIZENS the same consideration as illegals?
 
Try as I might, I cannot find where our rights are granted to us by government. I also cannot find where the Constitution grants to the federal government any right to restrict or control immigration.

"Naturalization", yes; immigration, no.

The Constitution does grant the Federal Government the right to enact laws via the legislative process, it does not limit their ability to enact laws on immigration or border security. Laws were duly enacted on immigration and border security, they’re just being selectively enforced. Or are you saying Congress didn’t have the authority to enact that legislation? So, we have constitutionally valid immigration/border security laws, do you propose we just ignore them? What is the threshold for how many people we allo to enter the country without going through the legally mandated process?
 
You seriously don't see how he attacks and tries to de-legitimize the media?
How many journalists have been arrested?
Zero
He can call them out all he wants
He can point out the inconsistencies in their reporting
He can even say they are wrong when they aren't
None of those things are infringements until he uses government force.
 
How many journalists have been arrested?
Zero
He can call them out all he wants
He can point out the inconsistencies in their reporting
He can even say they are wrong when they aren't
None of those things are infringements until he uses government force.

Getting pretty close to "will no one rid me of this turbulent journalist". It's like his incessant whining about SNL. What exactly is meant by "retribution" in this context?
 
Getting pretty close to "will no one rid me of this turbulent journalist". It's like his incessant whining about SNL. What exactly is meant by "retribution" in this context?
Close isn't infringement but are you also calling out Maxine Waters,Cory Booker, and a host of other prominent Democrats for the same or worse?
 
Close isn't infringement but are you also calling out Maxine Waters,Cory Booker, and a host of other prominent Democrats for the same or worse?

Whataboutism doesn't really work when Trump has the world's biggest podium. When the US president puts a "kick-me" sign on your back, you have a unique problem.

What do you think Trump is saying by SNL getting "retribution". Obviously there is no law or court that will hurt them for engaging in political satire in the US. Maybe it was a call to someone to do something. Of course, plausible deniability remains should anything unfortunate happens.
 
Getting pretty close to "will no one rid me of this turbulent journalist". It's like his incessant whining about SNL. What exactly is meant by "retribution" in this context?

Not sure I agree (not sure I disagree, either), but +1 for the Henry II reference.

To my mind, infringing on the media would mean proscribing 1a, shutting down papers, and jailing journos. He’s never liked the media and has used his bully pulpit for that, which is regrettable.
 
And the violent rhetoric on the left got Scalise shot.
If he calls for violent action then he should be held accountable - until then he has the same rights as everyone else.

Do I think he should be getting dirty in the trenches? No, but he enjoys it and it's working for him so far.
 
I just happened to overhear some leftist talk show talking about this. It way actually pretty interesting. Because despite the couple people here complaining about “Trumps attack on the media”, when one person asked something to the effect of “have you ever felt threatened by Trump”, she replied something along the lines of “I mean we’re pretty hard on Trump, but no, I haven’t”.

So I mean even media personalities that hate Trump aren’t even claiming the sort of thing a few here are.
 
Back
Top Bottom