Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

Dem Calls For Banning Guns, Then Suggests Killing Americans Who Fight Back

This isn’t a joke.

John Salvatore

Published

on

Democrat Congressman Eric Swalwell of California might just run for president in 2020.

Why?

Who knows?

Trending: WATCH: Anti-Trump Fox News Host Throws Hissy Fit After Mueller Report Vindicates Trump

Then again, candidate Donald Trump wasn’t given much of a chance from the jump when he declared back in 2015, either.

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?

  • Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The thing about Swalwell is that he’s a typical progressive.

He wants guns confiscated by any means.

He even suggested nuking Americans who fight back.

From Daily Wire:

Swalwell made the comment in response to a May news article on his radical plan that was widely recirculated on Twitter on Friday in which he called for a $15 billion government program to confiscate millions of guns from Americans.

More from Swalwell, who admitted to conservative Dana Loesch he wants to ban guns:

Reactions:

https://twitter.com/dangainor/status/1063542850489597953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1063542850489597953&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailywire.com%2Fnews%2F38451%2Fdemocrat-calls-gun-confiscation-suggests-nuking-ryan-saavedra

The 2020 Democrat presidential field is likely to be as crowded as the GOP’s in 2016.

Possible contenders include:

Former Vice President Joe Biden. Former Attorney General Eric Holder, the only cabinet-level official to ever be held in contempt of Congress.

Twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Fame-seeking lawyer Michael Avenatti.

Senators Kamala Harris (CA), Cory Booker (NJ), and Elizabeth Warren (MA).

Sens. Bernie Sanders (VT) and Amy Klobuchar (MN).

Former New York City Mayor and billionaire Michael Bloomberg, too.

Why not Swalwell?

Add Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., to what is expected to be a crowded field lining up to run against President Donald Trump in 2020, according to Politico.

“He’s definitely running,” a source told Politico, because Rep. Swalwell has not officially announced his intentions to campaign for president.

Rep. Swalwell, 37, will reportedly be the first potential candidate to head to Iowa. He grew up in Iowa, the famed location of the Iowa Caucuses will kick off the primary season across the United States every four years.

How about soon to be ex-Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper?

From The Hill:

“I’m the governor of Colorado and I’m gonna run for president,” Hickenlooper said during a stop in New Hampshire, where he’s campaigning for down-ballot Democrats.

65 million people voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, and Texas Senate loser Beto O’Rourke just broke every single one of their hearts.

Beto has been caught lying about his mother being a “lifelong Republican” and saying he did not flee the scene of a hit and run accident (he actually did).

An undercover video reveals Beto’s team is using campaign funds to aid the migrant caravan making its way through Mexico to the United States.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

Beto Seemingly Calls for WAR Over Mueller Report Secrecy

The left just had to find some way to make the idea of transparency seem sensational, didn’t they?

Published

on

Beto O'Rourke

As the nation patiently awaits the findings of the Special Counsel report, a debate is raging. On both sides of the aisle, we are hearing that transparency is key.  Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General and self-proclaimed “heat shield” for Robert Mueller, has expressed his concerns over tarnishing the reputations of those not accused of a crime. The rest of America seems fairly well convinced, and rightly so, that there should be unfettered access to the report. And while this is undoubtedly a widely felt sentiment, the radical left just had to find a way to make it seem sensational. Cue 2020 presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke: “Republicans and Democrats should do whatever they can to make sure their constituents, the American people, can read that report, form their own judgement, make their own decisions, and that the truth comes out,” O’Rourke said at a campaign stop in South Carolina Friday. O’Rourke warned that America may not see another year if details of Russian interference in the 2016 election included in the Mueller report are not made public, saying, “This is an unprecedented attack on this country and on our democracy, and we are owed the facts. And if we do not receive them, 243 years in, there’s nothing that guarantees us a 244th.” O’Rourke is undoubtedly suggesting that a Civil War or revolution could take place over something that everyone already wants. Not only have a number of democrats parroted the “everyone should get to see everything” line, but they’ve done so in complete agreement with Trump-appointed Attorney General Bill Barr. For Beto to go nuclear in this statement is beyond bizarre, and sounds more like a coaxed soundbite than his true sentiment on the subject.

Continue Reading

News

Mueller Report Findings Expected by Congress Sunday

Monday morning’s water cooler chit chat has already been decided.

Published

on

russiagate

Is our long national nightmare actually over?  Well, that depends on who you ask today. For many, the completion of the Mueller report on Friday, without any additional indictments being suggest by the Special Counsel, was a huge win for President Trump.  It meant that there wasn’t evidence sufficient to bring charges against the President…perhaps. We should remember that the DOJ’s longstanding belief was that a sitting President could not be indicted. On the left side of the aisle, however, a tense wait has begun, with the Attorney General expected to hand off a summation of Mueller’s findings to Congress any minute. Attorney General William Barr was expected to release his first summary of Mueller’s findings on Sunday, people familiar with the process said, on what lawmakers anticipated could be a day of reckoning in the two-year probe into President Donald Trump and Russian efforts to elect him. Since receiving the report Friday, Barr has been deciding how much of it Congress and the public will see. Of course, for some democrats, this simply wouldn’t cut it. “I suspect that we’ll find those words of transparency to prove hollow, that in fact they will fight to make sure that Congress doesn’t get this underlying evidence,” Rep. Adam Schiff of California, chairman of the House intelligence committee, said on ABC’s “This Week.” His plan: Ask for information and if that’s denied, “subpoena. If subpoenas are denied, we will haul people before the Congress. And yes, we will prosecute in court as necessary to get this information.” For now, we will just wait and see. We do know one thing for certain:  Monday morning around the water coolor is going to be a happenin’ spot.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend