I've been thinking a bit about some of Q's recent post telling us to not believe in the "fake news" when referring to President Trump's statement regarding the ban of AR-15's. Trying to put together Q's advisory with Trump's statements was a bit baffling but when I thought about the process of passing a bill to "take the guns, THEN due process", my first thought was, "Is that even constitutional?"
My first assumption was that President Trump was simply ill informed about the legalities of confiscating guns prior to due process. My second thought was that there was no way he would not have known this as entrepreneurs tend to be fairly well informed about laws and regulations. Then I realized that perhaps his request to add the process of confiscating guns prior to due process was either a move to invalidate the bill to where even if it were passed by congress and signed by the President, it would be thrown out by the Supreme Court.
My other alternative theory was that this move was to taint the bill so much to where Republican lawmakers would never support it.
I don't know, I'm just trying to make sense out of this statement.
Let me know what you all think in the comments. It seems like there's something I'm missing here.
