Archive for the ‘Angie Craig’ Category

This afternoon, Tyler Kistner won the endorsement of Second District Republicans in Minnesota’s Second District. Tyler Kistner said:

I am truly honored to have earned the endorsement of the delegates and the Republican Party in the Second District. I’d like to thank Regina Barr and Erika Cashin for running a spirited campaign.

Now, our party must unite together to beat Angie Craig in November. These are not ordinary times, and the stakes have never been higher. Our country is facing an unprecedented enemy in the form of this pandemic and a record number of families and small businesses are hurting. I will fight for the people of Minnesota and work with President Trump to get our country and our economy back on track. I will stand up to the deceptive practices of China. I will be a steadfast leader in the fight to rein in our debt and deficit and get our fiscal house in order.

Angie Craig has already broken her promises to the Second District by taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from special interest groups in Washington DC. She has become nothing more than a puppet to Nancy Pelosi, Ilhan Omar, and the progressives that run her party.

I served Minnesota and our country as a Marine, now, I ask for the honor of going to Washington to serve you again.

Minnesota’s Second District is one of the races targeted by the NRCC. We can’t afford to let ‘Let them eat expensive ice cream’ Nancy Pelosi serve another term as Speaker. We can’t afford to have Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff lead one faux impeachment investigation after another while totally ignoring the infiltration of the Wuhan coronavirus with nary a bit of interest from Schiff, Pelosi or Nadler.

Pelosi negotiated while literally letting small businesses die while tens of millions of people filed for unemployment. Schiff impeached a president based solely on allegations. I don’t want any citizen tried solely based on allegations. While Pelosi negotiated and literally tens of millions of people lost their jobs, Angie Craig didn’t speak out. When Schiff impeached President Trump based solely on hearsay testimony, Angie Craig voted to impeach President Trump.

It’s clear that Craig’s talk about small businesses is just talk. It’s clear that Craig’s talk about civil rights is selective at best. It’s time to throw her out this November.

When Chuck Schumer shut down the government for a weekend, he suffered a political backlash that likely cost him the Senate majority. It was one of the dumbest political stunts in political history. (Read more about it here.) As bad as Schumer’s Shutdown was for Senate Democrats, Pelosi’s Payroll Protection Program, aka PPP, will make Schumer’s Shutdown seem like a little turbulence.

When the SBA account ran dry Thursday afternoon, Pelosi took to TV to brag about shutting down those businesses. When she was asked on C-SPAN why she let the PPP run out of money, she stuttered:


Here is Pelosi bragging that Democrats shut down small businesses nationwide:

How tone-deaf is Pelosi? It’s possible that she’s the most tone-deaf politician in U.S. history. After watching this, wouldn’t you agree?


Middle class families’ lives hang in the balance and she’s playing Marie Antoinette. How heartless is she? How spineless are Democrats like Debbie Dingell, Adam Schiff, Dean Phillips and Angie Craig? Thursday afternoon, Craig said that she’s working hard after hearing that the PPP ran out of money. Apparently, Craig didn’t think that criticizing Pelosi for letting the fund dry up was her responsibility. Then again, Phillips is MIA on this. How’s that fit into his resume of being a vital part of the Problem Solvers Caucus? Phillips has been MIA within the Problem Solvers Caucus, too.

Pelosi just ate the economic downturn by shafting small businesses and their employees. It isn’t likely that they’ll let Pelosi or Democrats off the hook for that decision. Further, voters shouldn’t let Democrats off the hook for not listening to Main Street.

Whether he’ll admit it or not, Mini Mike Bloomberg is a special interest group unto himself. It isn’t likely that he’ll admit that but he’s the Democrats’ biggest special interest group. In 2018, Mr. Bloomberg contributed at least $80,000,000 to Democrats running for the U.S. House of Representatives.

It isn’t likely that Bloomberg contributed to Democrats running in “rural, conservative-leaning districts where his views on guns and other issues could stir an uproar, according to people briefed on his plans, some of whom spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.” The people who accepted Mini Mike’s campaign contributions are beholden to him. The first logical question to ask is this: what does a candidate sign up for when they accept Mini Mike’s campaign contribution? This statement tells us:

In the last election, for example, I spent nearly ten million dollars to help a Republican, Pat Toomey, get re-elected in Pennsylvania. I disagree with him on many issues. But after the Newtown, Connecticut shooting, he broke with the NRA and co-wrote a bipartisan bill to close the background check loophole. At the same time, I spent roughly the same amount to help successfully elect a Democrat in New Hampshire – Maggie Hassan – who was running to defeat a Republican incumbent who had voted against Toomey’s bill.

This year, I’m supporting both Republican and Democratic gubernatorial candidates who have shown strong leadership on gun safety, the environment, education, and other critical issues facing the country.

In other words, Mini Mike supports liberals from both parties. If they’re spineless and controllable, Mini Mike will consider contributing to them. That statement doesn’t tell the whole truth, though. In this video, though, Mini Mike slipped:

This paragraph says everything:

In fairness, some Republicans have taken their constitutional and legislative responsibilities seriously, like my friend John McCain. But too many have been absolutely feckless, including – most disappointingly – the House leadership.

Unified Republican leadership of government produced the Trump-GOP tax cuts that’ve lit a fire under the economy. Unified GOP government allowed Republicans to use the Congressional Review Act, which was used to revitalize the fossil fuel energy industry. That, in turn, allowed the U.S. to become energy independent while crippling Russia’s economy, and helped build the strongest economy in decades. If that’s Mini Mike’s definition of feckless leadership, give me tons of that type of leadership.

Compare that with Nancy Pelosi’s leadership. During this session, Pelosi’s puppets have spent tens of millions of dollars to impeach a president based on hearsay evidence testimony. My bad. I meant testimony because, except in rare cases, hearsay isn’t proof. The other thing of note that this Congress has accomplished is ratifying the USMCA trade agreement. That’s it in eighteen months.

If you want the next congress to march to the Resistance Movement/Bloomberg drum, ignore the Bloomberg/Democrat special interest syndicate. If you want Congress to work for you, there’s only this simple choice: Vote for unified Republican government.

While President Trump was implementing a travel ban to and from China, Democrats accused President Trump of being xenophobic and a racist. This weekend, medical members of the coronavirus task force praised President Trump’s decision. Democrats, including Mini Mike, have twisted President Trump’s words. Democrats said that President Trump called the coronavirus a hoax. Here’s what President Trump actually said:

President Trump jeered Democrats Friday night for criticizing his response to the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak, saying that it was a “new hoax” after a failed attempt to remove him from office over Ukraine.

“They tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia — that didn’t work out too well,” Trump told a cheering crowd in South Carolina. “They tried the impeachment hoax. That was a perfect conversation. And this is the new hoax,” Trump declared.
***
“Let’s get this right: A virus starts in China, makes its way into various countries all around the world, doesn’t spread widely at all in the United States because of the early actions that myself and my administration took against a lot of other wishes. And the Democrats’ single talking point and you see it is that it’s Donald Trump’s fault,” he said.

If you want a congress that’s controlled by a narcissistic, egotistical elitist that things that farming is what stupid people do and that thinks it’s ok to control your lives while decrying money in politics, vote Democrat. If you’re sane, though, it’s time to vote GOP. If you want to vote for a one-man special interest group, vote Democrat.

When Speaker Pelosi announced on Thursday morning that she was instructing Chairman Nadler’s committee to start drafting articles of impeachment, what she was really doing was admitting that Democrats would lose their House majority Next November. What I’ve been convinced of is that Republicans would retake the House barring a massive voter fraud effort by Democrats. Forget the 31 Democrats representing districts that Trump won in 2016. The majority of those districts will be flipped by Republicans next November. Depending on turnout and enthusiasm, it’s possible that the vast majority of those districts will get flipped by Republicans.

The next set of targets for flipping are seats where President Trump came close to winning but fell just a little short. MN-2 and MN-3 fit into that category perfectly, where Angie Craig and Dean Phillips currently hold the seats. Both are seats that Republicans have held literally for decades. It’ll take a bit of a fight but those seats should return to the GOP fold.

Thanks to the RNC’s fundraising haul, the GOP is hosting massive voter registration drives at Trump rallies across the nation. A significant number of those rallies aren’t hosted in districts that are GOP-friendly — yet. Depending on the national mood next fall, these districts might constitute the third set of districts targeted.

There’s no question that Pelosi wants to maintain her majority. She knows, though, that they’ve focused too much attention on impeachment and not nearly enough attention on fulfilling policy promises. There’s no getting rid of the Do-Nothing Democrats label. Resist Movement Democrats dug a hole with their my-way-or-the-highway attitude. That isn’t where the nation is.

If Democrats don’t get rid of that group of Democrats, which they really can’t, they’ll be the minority party for awhile. Pelosi fought the AOC wing. In the end, she had to cave to their pressure. Now, it’ll cost them their gavels.

Earlier tonight, Democrat ‘moderates’ Angie Craig, Collin Peterson and Dean Phillips voted against censuring Democrat Impeachment Chairman Adam Schiff for lying to the American people while delivering his opening statement in the Maguire hearing. For those who don’t remember that hearing by that name, it’s the one where Democrat Impeachment Chairman opened with this speech:

Here’s the heart of Schiff’s speech:

horn of its rambling character and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the president communicates. We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him.

In Schiff’s speech, it’s clear that he’s signaling that President Trump threatened Ukrainian President Zelensky with the withholding of military aid. According to Schiff’s fake phone call transcript, that military aid would be withheld from Ukraine if President Zelensky didn’t “make up dirt on my political opponent, understand. Lots of it.”

The bottom line is this — Adam Schiff, the Democrats’ Impeachment Chairman, lied to Congress and the American people. This isn’t just a silly prank. Schiff’s speech is permanently part of the Congressional Record. Minnesota’s ‘moderate Democrats’ didn’t think Schiff’s dishonest speech was worthy of official criticism. These ‘moderate Democrats’ thought that the man leading an investigation to remove the president of the United States shouldn’t be officially criticized. Perhaps, it’s because they bought Schiff’s BS that this was a parody. If that’s a parody, how do Phillips, Peterson and Craig explain this paragraph from Schiff’s speech?

This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the president says here that is in America’s interest after all.

Schiff said it with his own words that “this is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine.” That’s a pretty fanciful interpretation of the transcript. Here’s what President Trump actually told President Zelensky:

I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation … I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you said yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

Nothing in Schiff’s speech sounds like anything from Trump’s phone call. It’s appalling that Minnesota’s supposedly moderate Democrats bought Schiff’s BS and voted the way that Pelosi wanted them to vote. They aren’t moderates. They’re just gullible Democrats.

Democrats can’t pretend that they’re moderates because they’re doing things that are historically unprecedented. Recently, Schiff said that he’s essentially doing the work of a special counsel. I don’t disagree with that. The problem is that Special Counsel Robert Mueller was officially employed by the DOJ. Schiff’s biggest problem is that the DOJ is part of the executive branch. Impeachment chairs are fixtures of the legislative branch.

The Constitution matters

This says everything:

Former special counsel Robert Mueller led the Russia probe, but no new prosecutor has been tapped by Attorney General William Barr for the Ukraine matter. That leaves House Democrats with only a whistleblower’s complaint rather than boxes of investigators’ evidence to guide them. “Congress has to do that,” Schiff said, because the Justice Department believes “there’s nothing to see here.”

Schiff, the chairman of the House intelligence committee, is leading the probe at the direction of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and proceeding like the prosecutor he once was, staging a grand jury-like process that has been pilloried by Republicans. As Schiff works behind closed doors to build the case, Republicans accuse Democrats of waging an unfair, and according to the White House, illegitimate, investigation. But Schiff says the House has few other choices than to build the case on its own.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that members of the legislative branch have the authority to impanel investigative grand juries. If the DOJ tells the legislative branch to pound sand if the House refers cases to the DOJ, that’s what happens when you lose elections. When Republicans made criminal referrals to Eric Holder’s DOJ about the IRS scandal and Holder rejected those referrals, Trey Gowdy couldn’t impanel a grand jury to investigate Eric Holder. That was it. If the DOJ says no, then the answer is no. Period.

The thing is that Schiff didn’t bother trying to hide his attempt to be an investigator/prosecutor. He said this right out in the open.

Since Angie Craig and Dean Phillips announced that they supported impeachment proceedings, they’ve resisted making it a level playing field for Republicans and Democrats alike. Thus far, the ‘rules’ have been made up on the fly.

If that’s the Democrats’ definition of constitutional fairness, I don’t think many people will agree with Democrats. We’ve been told by Ms. Pelosi that this is a solemn matter that requires constant prayer and introspection. These hearings haven’t featured fairness, much less constitutional principles. Why haven’t Phillips and Craig insisted on investigative fairness? If this is supposed to be a time of solemnity, why hasn’t Schiff displayed fairness throughout?

Craig and Phillips flipped their opinions on whether to conduct an investigation into impeachment based on nothing. Let’s remember that these freshmen Democrats switched their opinions before the facts of the case changed. When Craig and Phillips switched to yes on the impeachment investigation, they didn’t switch their opinion on whether they think President Trump should be impeached.

Craig and Phillips switched their opinion the Friday before Queen Nancy declared the impeachment inquiry was official. Let’s not forget that the Trump-Zelensky transcript wasn’t released until the day after Queen Nancy’s declaration. Let’s not forget that the CIA snitch’s complaint wasn’t released until that Thursday. It’s fair to ask Craig and Phillips why they changed their minds.

Let’s ask this Democrat duo what rules must be put in place to ensure fairness and constitutional due process. Should President Trump’s attorneys have the right to confront President Trump’s accusers? If not, why not? If defendants’ representation are allowed to cross-examine witnesses, shouldn’t a man have that right if he’s about to potentially be thrown out of office?

Craig and Phillips haven’t pushed for a real impeachment vote. Apparently, they won’t vote for a real investigation. Apparently, Democrats are willing to vote for articles of impeachment without an investigation:

House Democrats believe they have the 217 votes needed to pass articles of impeachment against President Trump stemming from his Ukraine call, enough votes to impeach Trump and send articles to the Senate, even before their planned hearings or formal investigation.

That’s breathtakingly stunning. At least 40 of those Democrats just signed their political death certificate. It might reach higher; perhaps as much as 50-55 might get defeated. These Democrats just said that they’ll vote to undo an election without conducting an investigation. Remember this moment of solemnity?

That’s when Ms. Pelosi said “The actions taken to date by the President have seriously violated the Constitution, especially when the President says that “Article II says that I can do whatever I want.” It’s time Ms. Pelosi went to law school. She apparently hasn’t figured out that due process is a constitutional right. Likewise, Ms. Pelosi apparently doesn’t know that the right to a speedy trial doesn’t mean skipping the investigation.

Angie Craig and Dean Phillips are part of that 217 vote majority who will vote to impeach President Trump without investigating him. If that isn’t the definition of radicalism, then such a definition doesn’t exist. Craig and Phillips should join a lengthy list of radical Democrats who’ll need to look for work come New Years Day 2020.

When I read Angie Craig’s quotes in this article, the first thing I thought of was that Craig wasn’t happy with Speaker Pelosi’s initial actions. Craig is quoted as saying “The speaker listened. That’s all she did today. The speaker listened to us. I’m in a district where I think I’ve been reluctant to move forward only from the perspective of, I want to be disciplined, I want to look at due process, and I want to make sure we have all of our facts. And this inquiry will allow us to do that. And I’m very supportive of Adam Schiff and what he and his committee [are doing].”

The first thing that jumps off the page at me is that she’s “very supportive of Adam Schiff.” That’s a stunning admission on Craig’s part. She’s representing Minnesota’s 2nd District, not Minnesota’s 4th or Fifth districts.

Further, asking the most tone-deaf Democrat politician how to message something in a Minnesota House race sounds a little desperate. I’d also suggest that people who don’t know how to message an issue probably shouldn’t have staked out their political position. I’d point Ms. Craig to this article, which says this:

According to a Quinnipiac University national poll published Wednesday morning, Limbaugh may be on to something. The poll, which received 1,337 responses from registered voters across the political spectrum, indicated that support for Trump’s impeachment sits below 40 percent. Opposition, on the other hand, is at 57 percent.

My point is that this isn’t a packaging issue. It’s a content issue. This is how Doug Collins expressed it in his opening statement for the House Judiciary Committee’s Lewandowski hearing:

Collins said that “I’ve never seen a majority who’ve been so amazed with packaging in my life. You know why? It’s because they can’t sell what’s inside.” Craig has the same difficulty. It isn’t the packaging. It’s the crap that’s inside. Just a third of registered voters want Democrats to impeach President Trump. The American people are trying to tell Pelosi’s Democrats that this isn’t that big of a deal to them. They’re saying that this doesn’t rise to the level of “treason, bribery, high crimes or misdemeanors.”

Ms. Craig has a Schiff problem. She’s listening to Chairman Schiff too much. That won’t play well next October because Schiff has said a thousand things that are perfect for campaign commercials. Schiff is a California nutjob. That might play well in Minnesota’s 4th or Fifth districts but Minnesota’s 2nd District is a totally different critter.

The Democrats are heading for a difficult year whoever they pick as their presidential nominee. The bad news for them is that things can get worse if Democrats are pictured as Do-Nothing Democrats or Impeachment Democrats.

I wish I could say that I’m surprised to find out that Angie Craig and Dean Philips aren’t moderates. I’d be lying if I said that they were. Simply put, they aren’t moderate. According to this article, we now have proof that Craig and Phillips aren’t moderates. We know that because they’re now on board with impeaching President Trump for the flimsiest of reasons:

Minnesota Democratic Reps. Dean Phillips and Angie Craig have been moderates on impeachment, but an accusation that President Donald Trump asked Ukraine to investigate a political rival is changing that. Trump is accused of pressing Ukraine’s leader to help investigate political rival Joe Biden at the same time the White House was withholding $250 million in aid to that country. Trump says he’s done nothing wrong.

Phillips says it appears Trump “invited foreign interference in our democracy” in a way “that is corrupt at best (and) treasonous at worst.” He says if the accusation is proven, “we must pursue articles of impeachment.” Craig went farther in her statement on Monday, saying it is time to open impeachment proceedings now.

Nobody has seen the transcript of the call. Further, Phillips should know better than to say that President Trump’s alleged statements can’t amount to treason because it’s only possible to commit treason when we’re at war. Further, Phillips flipped based on a rumor. If he doesn’t know what’s in the document, what’s the justification for flipping? I suspect that Phillips wanted to support impeachment but he had to act like a moderate until the next faux indignation happened.

Here’s what Phillips is quoted as saying:

“Our Constitution transcends any person, politician, or political party, and I call on the House Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, and Judiciary Committees to use every legal mechanism possible to obtain all relevant evidence.

If the reports are corroborated, we must pursue articles of impeachment and report them to the full House of Representatives for immediate consideration.”Think about what Phillips just said. He admitted in plain language that he doesn’t have evidence that President Trump has done anything wrong. Let’s contrast that with the Nixon impeachment. In Nixon’s case, there was a crime that’d been committed. There was something solid for Congress to investigate. In this case, the Democrats’ faux investigation is actually a fishing trip. They’ve heard a rumor and their hatred of President Trump pushes the Democrats’ buttons.

Instead of doing real work, like fixing immigration or keeping the Trump economy strong, Democrats have invested most of their time on investigation after investigation after investigation. That’s why I’ve nicknamed these Democrats the Do-Nothing Democrats.

Craig didn’t even do that. She said “It is clear that the sitting president of the United States placed his own personal interests above the national security of the United States. When there is an abuse of power of this magnitude, it is our responsibility to stand up for what is right. This is why I am calling to open impeachment proceedings — immediately, fairly and impartially.”

First, I demand to know what President Trump did that constitutes abuse of power. In his explanation, President Trump said that he demanded that the Ukrainian president clean up the corruption so that America’s money wasn’t stolen by international grifters (my words, no President Trump’s.). That doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment. It isn’t close.

Constitutional definition of impeachment

They should especially highlight Article II, Section 4, which says “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Here’s hoping that this duo is booted out after a single term. This time, I hope We The People throw them out via the vote, not by having a Dayton-like temper tantrum..

According to this article, Democrat activists have pushed Angie Craig into supporting President Trump’s impeachment. Ms. Craig hasn’t been a portrait in courage since getting elected. Instead, she’s been part of the Do-Nothing Democrat Caucus since its inception. To her credit, Craig has admitted (in a roundabout way) that President Trump’s economy is working but that government is failing to provide Minnesota’s workers:

We have a major skills gap in the Minnesota job market. Minnesota employees cannot find the skilled workers they need with the right qualifications, and right now job seekers are having a difficult time getting the skills they need for the high-paying jobs that are available today. College isn’t the right path for every student and we shouldn’t be limiting the options of Minnesota students by underfunding or de-emphasizing technical education and career skills programs.

If employers are having a difficult time finding workers with the right qualifications, that’s an endorsement that President Trump’s economy is working. It’s also an indictment that government isn’t doing its job of training students to be productive members of the workforce. But I digress. That’s a topic for another day.

Far-left activists and politicians have been demanding the impeachment of President Trump since the first day he got elected. The problem is that according to a recent poll by Monmouth University only 35% agree that President Trump should be impeached.

University of Minnesota Professor Richard Painter who previously challenged Tina Smith for the US Senate in the Democratic Primary raised some eyebrows when he implied he was unhappy that he didn’t feel that Angie Craig was aggressive enough on impeaching President Trump.

No problem for Angie Craig:


All it took for Angie Craig to admit that she’s pro-impeachment was getting called out by a far left activist. If that isn’t a profile in courage, what is? Angie Craig is an empty pantsuit. How left is Richard Painter? This far left:


Angie Craig is now admittedly pro-impeachment and pro-single-payer health care. Whoever is the Republicans’ candidate against Craig should remind voters of those 2 things morning, noon and night every day through Election Day, 2020. I’ll buy that CD-2 is shifting demographically. I don’t buy that they’re shifting to a hard-left district that’s as far left as MN-04 or MN-05.

After reading Tina Smith’s quote in this article, it isn’t difficult to not trust Democrats when guns are concerned.

When asked if she thinks Congress would pass universal background checks this year or next, Smith is quoted as saying “I’m not optimistic. We’ve seen this cycle over and over again: concerns, promises to take action and then backtracking.”

Then there’s Angie Craig, another Democrat who sounded like an idiot when she said “The fact is most Americans support common-sense gun legislation. The only thing stopping it is the special interests that seem to have control over some politicians in Congress. I’m sick and tired of the NRA.” The article nots that “Craig supports universal background checks and banning what she called ‘military-style assault weapons.'”

What’s appalling is that neither Craig or Smith know the first thing about guns, yet they want to tell gun owners what they can’t do. As for Craig saying “I’m sick and tired of the NRA”, that shows how ignorant of who the NRA is. The NRA are people from all across the United States determined to prevent politicians from gutting the Second Amendment. Before people say that that’s conspiracy theory talk, I’ll show you a trio of Democrats running for president who support firearm confiscation:

Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) told reporters in New Hampshire on Friday that mandatory buybacks were “a good idea.”

Presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, the former congressman from El Paso, spent the final weeks of August demanding mandatory buybacks of millions of assault rifles currently owned by law-abiding Americans. “All of them,” he tweeted defiantly.

Elizabeth Warren is the other Democrat presidential candidate who supports a mandatory confiscation of assault weapons.

Democrats love using the euphemism buyback instead of confiscation for obvious reasons. Confiscation is the right term. It’s impossible to buy something back that wasn’t your property previously. Since the government didn’t own the guns previously, it can’t buy them back. Democrats know this but that won’t prevent them from using that dishonest term repeatedly during this debate.

Here’s something to contemplate: if felons commit crimes, is it logical to violate law-abiding citizens’ Constitutional rights? Here’s another question worth pondering: will any of the Democrats’ solutions stop even 1 mass shooting? Thus far, the answer to that question is an emphatic no.

That’s because the Democrats aren’t looking at what’s caused mass casualties. With the Parkland shooting, the shooter told people that he was going to kill students. Rather than taking him seriously, the people running Marjorie Stoneman Douglas turned a blind eye towards the shooter. That was just a continuation of what they did earlier in his school career:

Cruz’s eighth-grade language arts teacher, Carrie Yon, kept diligent notes on his behavior for Cruz’s “Functional Behavior Analysis”:

Sept. 3: While reviewing [a] homophones worksheet, when another student mentioned the amendment that talks about ‘the right to bear arms’ Nick [sic] lit up when hearing the word that related to guns and shouted out “you mean like guns!” he was overly excited thinking that we were going to talk about guns. Nick later used his pencil as a gun … shooting around the classroom.

Then there’s this:

Yon provided her opinion for the “Functional Behavioral Analysis”:

“I feel strongly that Nikolas is a danger to the students and faculty at this school. I do not feel that he understands the difference between his violent video games and reality. He is constantly showing aggressive behavior and poor judgment. His drawing in class show violent acts (people shooting at each other) or creepy sexual pictures (dogs with large penises) … I would like to see him sent to a facility that is more prepared and has the proper setting to deal with this type of child.”

That doesn’t include talking about the other government failures prior to Cruz’s Valentine’s Day massacre. Those things don’t fit into the Democrats’ narrative so they’re ignored. The Democrats’ constant focus is on things that won’t stop these shootings. Democrats only want things that are ineffective or are marginally effective. For instance, the 1994 assault weapons ban didn’t prevent a single mass shooting.

Until Democrats study what’s causing these shootings and become interested in connecting the dots with the people pulling the triggers, I’ll remain skeptical of the Democrats’ gun-grabbing plans.