News

ICYMI: Anti-Trump Dianne Feinstein Introduces Bill to Ban Assault Weapons (Details)

The constitution? Who needs it!?

Published

2 months ago

January 12, 2019

John Salvatore

484shares
Share
Tweet

Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein was one of the major players behind the Brett Kavanaugh fiasco, having planned the abomination America saw play out on the small screen for months.

Feinstein is back in the news today, quietly introducing an assault weapons ban bill.

Maybe she thought we wouldn’t catch it?

take our poll - story continues below

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.

Well, she was wrong.

From Free Beacon:

Democrats and Republicans introduced dueling gun proposals this week in the Senate with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) pushing a new gun-ban proposal and Sen. John Cornyn (R., Tex.) attempting to expand gun-carry protections across the country.

Feinstein’s bill, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2019, would ban the sale, manufacture, transfer, and importation of certain semiautomatic firearms. The text of the bill has not yet been released, but Feinstein’s office said it would ban any firearm capable of accepting a detachable magazine and either a “pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock.” Firearms fitting the description would become illegal to sell if the bill was passed but those already legally owned would remain legal but become subject to additional regulations. Transfers of so-called high capacity magazines would also be banned under the proposal, though the senator’s office didn’t specify what would constitute a “high capacity.”

“Last year we saw tens of thousands of students nationwide take to the streets to demand action to stop mass shootings and stem the epidemic of gun violence that plagues our communities,” Feinstein said in a statement. “Our youngest generation has grown up with active-shooter drills, hiding under their desks—and now they’re saying enough is enough. Americans across the nation are asking Congress to reinstate the federal ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. If we’re going to put a stop to mass shootings and protect our children, we need to get these weapons of war off our streets.”

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

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.

So basically @RepSwalwell wants a war. Because that’s what you would get. You’re outta your fucking mind if you think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov all the power. https://t.co/bK1GVyjFej

— Joe Biggs (@Rambobiggs) November 16, 2018

And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.

— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018

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

She’s not lying. We should ban assault weapons by buying them back or restricting them to ranges/clubs. #EnoughIsEnough https://t.co/XbRpOvXlF3

— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018

Fair question. Rifles. They’re more powerful and cause more carnage when used with a pistol-grip. See @ScottPelley @60Minutes piece. To reduce semi-auto pistol deaths I’d have universal background checks and mandatory reporting on mental health.

— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018

Reactions:

"If you don't turn over your guns, we'll nuke you" is definitely a reasonable argument to make. https://t.co/4YFDxi1CPf

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) November 16, 2018

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

What the hell is this? Is this guy insane? 👇🏻 https://t.co/mTbOMC8xY2

— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) November 16, 2018

It must not be against @Twitter TOS to casually insinuate that it’s better to give up our guns than die in a thermo-nuclear blast at the hands of the U.S. gov’t.

☢️☢️☢️

¯_(ツ)_/¯ https://t.co/3Zo1m93ikO

— Conservative Review (@CR) November 16, 2018

“You don’t need AR-15s because the government isn’t tyrannical, and, anyway, if you try to stop us taking them we will nuke you” is my favorite of all the gun control talking points.

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) November 16, 2018

I'm stunned there were enough sheep to vote so this guy ended up with a "Rep" in front of his name. The U.S. government is now going to nuke…….get this……..its own people. https://t.co/S0NuyMZD2r

— Pat Miletich (@patmiletich) November 16, 2018

Personally, I have a bigger problem with an elected official blithely talking about nuking his fellow Americans than my neighbor owning an AR-15. But YMMV. https://t.co/yfiRAeuCn3

— Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) November 16, 2018

You assume that members of our combined forces would follow unconstitutional orders, and take up arms against citizens of the United States. Short war indeed. .cc @DLoesch @KyleKashuv

— Matthew Kolken (@mkolken) November 16, 2018

AR-15s are so dangerous that we must nuke gun owners to confiscate them

— Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) November 16, 2018

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.

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

"I will not be a candidate for president in 2020,” Beto O'Rourke tells @GarrettHaake.

“That’s I think as definitive as those sentences get.” https://t.co/aLDxTCMo4q pic.twitter.com/jPdiTZHOiS

— MSNBC (@MSNBC) November 5, 2018

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.

484shares
Share
Tweet

Up Next

California Governor Gavin Newsom Set to Implement New Tax — On Drinking Water

Don't Miss

Smart TV Data Collection Now Offsetting Manufacturer Costs

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

Public Trust in Mueller Probe Plummets in New Polling

This is BAD NEWS for Mr. Mueller, who’s longstanding and widespread investigation may or may not be nearing an end.

Published

7 hours ago

March 18, 2019

Andrew West

For months upon months, the American people have been wearing a rather large albatross around their figurative neck.

For you see, in the shadows of Capitol Hill lurks Robert Mueller: The Special Counsel tasked, originally, with finding evidence of collusion between the 2016 Donald Trump campaign and the Russian government.

So far, this boogeyman of the GOP has done little but annoy some of the outer fringes of Trump’s former inner-circle, and in no connection to Russia, the Kremlin, or Vladimir Putin yet. This has led a great many Americans to cast their own doubts on the Mueller probe, wondering instead if this is all but a “witch hunt”, out to gather any and all dirt necessary to keep President Trump from winning reelection.

take our poll - story continues below

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.

New polling suggests that more and more Americans are finding themselves in this world of doubt.

Amid signs that special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian election interference may be near its conclusion, a new USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll finds that trust in Mueller has eroded and half of Americans now agree with President Trump’s contention that he has been the victim of a “witch hunt.”

Support for the House of Representatives to seriously consider impeaching the president has dropped since last October by 10 percentage points, to 28 percent.

Despite that, the survey shows a nation that remains skeptical of Trump’s honesty and deeply divided by his leadership. A 52 percent majority say they have little or no trust in the president’s denials that his 2016 campaign colluded with Moscow in the election that put him in the Oval Office.

But here’s the kicker…

What’s more, Trump’s relentless attacks on Mueller and his inquiry have taken a toll on the special counsel’s credibility. Now, 28 percent say they have a lot of trust in the former FBI director’s investigation to be fair and accurate. That’s the lowest level to date, and down five points since December.

There are conflicting reports as to the status of Mueller’s investigation, with dueling tales of crescendo and climax appearing nearly daily in the news.

News

DNA Evidence Has Unmasked Jack The Ripper, Once and For All

It looks as though police were hot on the trail of The Ripper in 1888, but they couldn’t seal the deal.

Published

8 hours ago

March 18, 2019

Andrew West

There are some mysteries that the human race may never truly get to the bottom of, and that’s okay.

It’s these ethereal wonderments that add a little spooky spice to our lives. Everyone has a ghost story, a lot of folks think they’ve seen UFO’s, and how many times have you heard a song on the radio just after thinking about it?

Pop culture is full of these mysteries as well; The Bermuda Triangle, the alleged UFO crash at Roswell, and others have been fascinating people all over the world for ages.

take our poll - story continues below

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.

Now it seems as though one of England’s most sinister mysteries has been solved.

A blood-covered shawl found at one of the murder scenes is believed to contain DNA from both butchered victim Catherine Eddowes and the world’s most infamous serial killer.

Researchers at Liverpool John Moores University conducted genetic tests on the sample long-thought to have belonged to the Ripper himself, who they now believe to be Pole Aaron Kosminski.

The process used was painstaking, but for the sake of accuracy.

“We describe for the first time systematic, molecular level analysis of the only surviving physical evidence linked to the Jack the Ripper murders,” the authors wrote in the Journal of Forensic Sciences.

This is also the second time that Kosminski was scientifically linked to the shawl by DNA.