Pelosi Shames Trump: Why Don't You Declare Gun Violence a National Emergency?

[DonViejo]

Pelosi Shames Trump: Why Don’t You Declare Gun Violence a National Emergency?

by Tommy Christopher | Feb 14th, 2019, 4:29 pm

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi reacted to the announcement that Trump will declare a national emergency at the border by asking, on the first anniversary of the gun massacre in Parkland, Florida, why he doesn’t declare gun violence a national emergency.

At her weekly press conference Thursday, Pelosi was asked about Trump’s intention to declare a national emergency in order to secure funds for the border wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for.

-snip-

“You want to talk about a National emergency? Let’s talk about today,” she said. “The one-year anniversary of another manifestation of the epidemic of gun violence in America. That’s a national emergency. Why don’t you declare that emergency, Mr. President? I wish you would.”

“But a Democratic president can do that, a Democratic president can declare emergencies as well. So the precedent that the president is setting here is something that should be met with great unease and dismay by the Republicans,” Pelosi concluded.

The speaker was later asked if she would want to see a Democratic president declare a national emergency in order to enact gun laws, and she clarified that she would not.

“No I’m just saying if president could do that, if you want to go down that path, then let’s look at me really is a national emergency,” Pelosi said. “I’m not advocating for any president doing an end-run around Congress. I’m just saying that the Republicans should have some dismay about the door that they are opening, the threshold they are crossing.”

full article + video
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/pelosi-shames-trump-why-dont-you-declare-gun-violence-a-national-emergency/

[Blue Owl]

1. Easy -- because he and his cronies can't profit from it

n/t

[uponit7771]

2. K&R,

[jalan48]

3. I don't think Trump feels shame.

[Vdizzle]

4. They are wagering.

The Repubs are wagering that when a Democratic President occupies the White House, that they will be an individual that is level headed and reasonable and will not wield the power of this new precedent. They are banking on the next Democratic President to be too civil to engage in such tactics. In other words, they think the next Democratic President will be too weak to declare an emergency on climate or guns and won’t go down that path and instead take the higher road like in the past. I call BS. We need a bulldog that will throw it right back in their racist faces. We need someone who will wield their power for good and tell the deplorables to STFU and watch while we clean up their disaster. We need someone who will take the reins and lead without regard to their ridiculous notions, beliefs, and programmed irrationalities.

[EndGOPPropaganda]

6. They're wagering the GOP propaganda machine can excuse Trump and stop Dems.

[not fooled]

5. He doesn't care

because he will be out of office by then. Just like he said with the debt pukes are running up with the tax scam.

He just wants to get his way now.

His reckless behavior and inability to think about consequences down the line are just additional reasons he is the worst person to be president. Although it's great that Speaker Pelosi took the opportunity to point out the potential consequences.

[Major Nikon]

8. The strategy goes way deeper though

She’s sending a message to congressional GOPhers that if they support this, the next President with a D is going to carve up the sacred cow (DOD) for pet Democrat projects and they will be powerless to stop it.

[kacekwl]

7. Thank you Speaker Pelosi.

[ffr]

9. Or the war on our democracy by Putin's Russia.

How about that as a national emergency? A real one we all see effecting us daily.

[Scalded Nun]

10. I do not think I'd waste the effort on a gun emergency

...not that there isn't one, because there is. But, I think that would get killed by the 2nd amendment.
Now, declare an emergency that really exists, a health care emergency in this country. Even the preamble of our Constitution states that the Constitution's purpose is to "...promote the general Welfare".

That would easily translate into Medicare for All, and I think that could be defended in the courts.

[MadDAsHell]

11. Problem with gun confiscation is neither the military nor police would reliably enforce it.

Half of them are probably NRA members. When jackboots own the police, military, and the highest courts, who are we counting on to actually enforce those stricter laws?

That's the fatal flaw often forgotten when it comes to stricter gun legislation discussions.