NRA Launches anti-Biden Attack Ads

[Toggle Almendro]

Biden's gun control plan does not include confiscating legally owned weapons and an interpretation of a "viral video" is a mishearing of what was said. The former vice president has said in the past that a Biden administration would come for people's "assault weapons."

This term "legally owned" is highly misleading. This is why people refer to CNN as fake news.

Mr. Biden plans to outlaw their possession before confiscating them, so they won't be legally owned when he comes for them.

I have my doubts whether Mr. Biden will be elected, and I have no doubts that the NRA will stop his plans cold if he is elected, but he'd come for our guns if he could.

 

[CaughtInThe]

So pathetic how the right-wing organizations like the NRA, Liberty University, and trump count on their members and voters' stupidity to make themselves rich at their members and voters expense.

The modern GOP is the haven for snake-oil salesman - that's why trump has such a high approval rating within the current GOP - they're lambs being led to their slaughter.

"marks"

 

[BlueTex]

"marks"

What the NRA needs to do is build a wall of guns and solicit donations for that project. An opening in that market has just become available..

 

[Rucker61]

It is hard to see how banning bump stocks violates Heller. They are not appropriate for self defense, and they are rather dangerous. The NRA openly supported the push to outlaw bump stocks.

They are appropriate for traditionally lawful purposes, and if the ATF uses the Hughes Amendment to ban them as machine guns, then they must be treated as firearms and given the "hundreds of thousands" hurdle for "in common use" then they are in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.

It isn't Heller that's the problem, however - it's the Constitutional separation of powers. The Constitution grants Congress the power to write laws, and they did write and pass the NFA 1934 which defined "machine gun" as "multiple rounds fired per one pull of the trigger". The bump stock enabled rifles fire one round per pull of the trigger, and in rewriting the laws to make bump stocks into machine guns they used powers not granted to the Executive Branch.

Besides, bump fire, which is all that bump stocks enable, isn't illegal.

With regards to your claim of "dangerous":

"As to “dangerous,” the court below held that a weapon is “dangerous per se” if it is “ ‘designed and constructed to produce death or great bodily harm’ and ‘for the purpose of bodily assault or defense.’ ” 470 Mass., at 779, 26 N. E. 3d, at 692 (quoting Commonwealth v. Appleby, 380 Mass. 296, 303, 402 N. E. 2d 1051, 1056 (1980)). That test may be appropriate for applying statutes criminalizing assault with a dangerous weapon. See ibid., 402 N. E. 2d, at 1056. But it cannot be used to identify arms that fall outside the Second Amendment. First, the relative dangerousness of a weapon is irrelevant when the weapon belongs to a class of arms commonly used for lawful purposes. See Heller, supra, at 627 (contrasting “ ‘dangerous and unusual weapons’ ” that may be banned with protected “weapons . . . ‘in common use at the time’ ”). Second, even in cases where dangerousness might be relevant, the Supreme Judicial Court’s test sweeps far too broadly. Heller defined the “Arms” covered by the Second Amendment to include “ ‘any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another.’ ” 554 U. S., at 581. Under the decision below, however, virtually every covered arm would qualify as “dangerous.”

 Were there any doubt on this point, one need only look at the court’s first example of “dangerous per se” weapons: “firearms.” 470 Mass., at 779, 26 N. E. 3d, at 692. If Heller tells us anything, it is that firearms cannot be categorically prohibited just because they are dangerous."

Caetano v Massachusetts, 2016.

CAETANO v. MASSACHUSETTS | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[notquiteright]

IF they are, (and I'm not saying they are)then I would rather see all that money they made off of me make them filthy ass rich then I would be dead. You tend not to come back from that. You have been listening to the Merchants of Death Bunch.

Seems a bit overblown dun'tcha think? :roll:

If you didn't die during the two terms Obama won (and the NRA was powerless to stop twice) what makes you think you are going to die now???

The leadership of the ILA/NRA are bilking the 'members' shamelessly, just like Bannon and his con crew, and the best argument is 'I ain't dead yet'???? :doh

You have been listening to the ILA/NRA fearmongering, some tend to not come back to reality after that... eace

 

[Mr Person]

No, because when he had a chance to pass "common sense" gun laws he didn't even try, and then after Democrats got thrown out of the House and Senate in droves, only then did he start complaining about Republicans' refusal to pass his idiotic gun laws.

The problem on the political front is that any gun control law is treated like a slippery slope to no guns, reasonableness having been ejected. I can only speculate as to the reaction if Obama was the one who demanded bump stock bans (or did he?)

The problem on the societal front is that because of how strong the 2nd has been interpreted to be, gun control can only make a few dents. There are more legal guns per person in this country, and however many illegal guns. Even the strictest gun control would have to be enforced to absurd standards that confirmed the fears of gun owners, and would STILL take decades. It ain't happening.

We're the illusion of the Wild Wild West that Hollywood painted last century, and that'll continue for all our lifetimes at least.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

They are appropriate for traditionally lawful purposes,

What traditionally lawful purposes are bump stocks appropriate for?

and if the ATF uses the Hughes Amendment to ban them as machine guns, then they must be treated as firearms and given the "hundreds of thousands" hurdle for "in common use" then they are in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.

How about just plain old Strict Scrutiny? Is there a compelling government interest in restricting access to bump stocks?

Were there any doubt on this point, one need only look at the court’s first example of “dangerous per se” weapons: “firearms.” 470 Mass., at 779, 26 N. E. 3d, at 692. If Heller tells us anything, it is that firearms cannot be categorically prohibited just because they are dangerous."
Caetano v Massachusetts, 2016.

There are differing degrees of danger. Bump stocks make a gun much more dangerous than an ordinary firearm is.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you didn't die during the two terms Obama won (and the NRA was powerless to stop twice) what makes you think you are going to die now???

Barack Obama did his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

Joe Biden will also do his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

The NRA stopped Barack Obama's plans from becoming law, and they will stop Joe Biden's plans too if he is elected.

The leadership of the ILA/NRA are bilking the 'members' shamelessly, just like Bannon and his con crew, and the best argument is 'I ain't dead yet'???? :doh

Protecting our civil liberties is a good thing.

You have been listening to the ILA/NRA fearmongering, some tend to not come back to reality after that... eace

Hard facts are not fearmongering. There is no need for conservatives to return to reality, as we have never left it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem on the societal front is that because of how strong the 2nd has been interpreted to be, gun control can only make a few dents.

This hasn't prevented the left from simply trying to ignore and violate the Heller ruling.

 

[Noodlegawd]

The problem on the political front is that any gun control law is treated like a slippery slope to no guns....

That is largely Democrats' doing.

Perhaps if they didn't recast deliberate, negotiated legislative compromises as loopholes to be plugged, there would be less concern about slippery slopes. Perhaps if they didn't frequently lie about their painfully obvious intentions, there would be less distrust.

 

[TurtleDude]

I certainly agree with the NRA advertisement. Biden is definitely anti-Second Amendment and anti-law enforcement. Trump, on the other hand, is pro-law enforcement, but also very anti-Second Amendment. So I can see the Democrat Party using the very same NRA ad against Trump by just changing the names.

A trump appointee is why the usually loony Ninth Circuit declared California's idiotic magazine ban unconstitutional. Obama judges hate the second amendment and Sotomayor voted against gun rights in McDonald v Chicago

 

[TurtleDude]

What traditionally lawful purposes are bump stocks appropriate for?



How about just plain old Strict Scrutiny? Is there a compelling government interest in restricting access to bump stocks?



There are differing degrees of danger. Bump stocks make a gun much more dangerous than an ordinary firearm is.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Barack Obama did his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

Joe Biden will also do his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

The NRA stopped Barack Obama's plans from becoming law, and they will stop Joe Biden's plans too if he is elected.



Protecting our civil liberties is a good thing.



Hard facts are not fearmongering. There is no need for conservatives to return to reality, as we have never left it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This hasn't prevented the left from simply trying to ignore and violate the Heller ruling.

bump stocks were created as a response to the idiotic 1986 Hughes Amendment.

 

[Glitch]

A trump appointee is why the usually loony Ninth Circuit declared California's idiotic magazine ban unconstitutional. Obama judges hate the second amendment and Sotomayor voted against gun rights in McDonald v Chicago

Trump also hates the Second Amendment, and would go out of his way to deliberately violate the rights of all Americans just to exact his sick and twisted revenge against the Second Amendment. You are aware that Trump wants to intentionally violate our Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments in order illegally seize firearms, right?

Trump is a direct threat to the Second Amendment as much, if not more, than Obama ever was.

 

[notquiteright]

Barack Obama did his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason. Joe Biden will also do his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason. The NRA stopped Barack Obama's plans from becoming law, and they will stop Joe Biden's plans too if he is elected. Protecting our civil liberties is a good thing. Hard facts are not fearmongering. There is no need for conservatives to return to reality, as we have never left it.

Just how did President Obama violate the 2nd amendment 'for no reason'???

Facts, not opinion on how Biden will 'do his best' to violate the 2nd A????

The NRA stopped nothing, I was a member for longer than I wanted to be- shot F-Class and held an NRA rating, signed postal matches for several shooters- the NRA trilled on and on about jack booted thugs if Obama was elected/was re-elected. The ILA/NRA failed miserably both times.

You have given ZERO hard facts, the Cons have rejected reality and substituted their own.... eace

 

[Rucker61]

What traditionally lawful purposes are bump stocks appropriate for?

Target shooting, for one. "Target shooting" is listed in the very first paragraph of the Gun Control Act of 1968 as a lawful use of firearms.

How about just plain old Strict Scrutiny? Is there a compelling government interest in restricting access to bump stocks?

Congress might claim that, but the Executive Branch doesn't have the enumerated power to make a law. Bump stocks enable bump fire. Period. Bump fire is not illegal.

There are differing degrees of danger. Bump stocks make a gun much more dangerous than an ordinary firearm is.

Boy, you really don't want to give the Democrats the key to that Pandora's Box. Anyway, Constitutionally, that doesn't matter.

"As to “dangerous,” the court below held that a weapon is “dangerous per se” if it is “ ‘designed and constructed to produce death or great bodily harm’ and ‘for the purpose of bodily assault or defense.’ ” 470 Mass., at 779, 26 N. E. 3d, at 692 (quoting Commonwealth v. Appleby, 380 Mass. 296, 303, 402 N. E. 2d 1051, 1056 (1980)). That test may be appropriate for applying statutes criminalizing assault with a dangerous weapon. See ibid., 402 N. E. 2d, at 1056. But it cannot be used to identify arms that fall outside the Second Amendment. First, the relative dangerousness of a weapon is irrelevant when the weapon belongs to a class of arms commonly used for lawful purposes. See Heller, supra, at 627 (contrasting “ ‘dangerous and unusual weapons’ ” that may be banned with protected “weapons . . . ‘in common use at the time’ ”). Second, even in cases where dangerousness might be relevant, the Supreme Judicial Court’s test sweeps far too broadly. Heller defined the “Arms” covered by the Second Amendment to include “ ‘any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another.’ ” 554 U. S., at 581. Under the decision below, however, virtually every covered arm would qualify as “dangerous.”

 Were there any doubt on this point, one need only look at the court’s first example of “dangerous per se” weapons: “firearms.” 470 Mass., at 779, 26 N. E. 3d, at 692. If Heller tells us anything, it is that firearms cannot be categorically prohibited just because they are dangerous."

Caetano v Massachusetts, 2016

Barack Obama did his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

Joe Biden will also do his best to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

We agree.

The NRA stopped Barack Obama's plans from becoming law, and they will stop Joe Biden's plans too if he is elected.

I disagree. The NRA no longer has the power to stop Joe Biden's plans if the Democrats take both Houses and the White House. We'll be dependent upon flip-flop Roberts, and that's something we would be very afraid of.

 

[Rucker61]

The problem on the political front is that any gun control law is treated like a slippery slope to no guns, reasonableness having been ejected. I can only speculate as to the reaction if Obama was the one who demanded bump stock bans (or did he?)

"Reasonableness" isn't part of the standard. Constitutionality, efficacy and enforceability are.

Slippery slope in regards to gun control stopped being a fallacy when Nancy Pelosi stated it was part of the strategy.


During an exchange with CBS News' Nancy Cordes, Pelosi suggested that Republicans might feel such a ban would be a "slippery slope" for other gun bills. "So what?" she said, adding, "I certainly hope so."


Nancy Pelosi calls on Ryan bring bump stock ban to floor - CBS News

 

[Toggle Almendro]

Trump also hates the Second Amendment, and would go out of his way to deliberately violate the rights of all Americans just to exact his sick and twisted revenge against the Second Amendment. You are aware that Trump wants to intentionally violate our Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments in order illegally seize firearms, right?
Trump is a direct threat to the Second Amendment as much, if not more, than Obama ever was.

As soon as he took office, Mr. Trump signed legislation to outlaw Mr. Obama's scheme to violate people's Second Amendment rights by falsely accusing them of insanity.

Mr. Trump appoints judges and justices who vote to uphold the Second Amendment instead of voting to ignore it.

Mr. Trump has never done anything to violate the Second Amendment.

Mr. Biden will do everything he can to try to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

Mr. Biden will appoint judges and justices who will vote to ignore the Second Amendment instead of enforcing it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just how did President Obama violate the 2nd amendment 'for no reason'???

I said he tried and the NRA stopped him. I didn't say he succeeded.

Facts, not opinion on how Biden will 'do his best' to violate the 2nd A????

The same way Mr. Obama tried: by trying to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns for no reason.

The NRA stopped nothing, I was a member for longer than I wanted to be- shot F-Class and held an NRA rating, signed postal matches for several shooters- the NRA trilled on and on about jack booted thugs if Obama was elected/was re-elected. The ILA/NRA failed miserably both times.

That is incorrect. Mr. Obama spent the entire first hundred days of his second term trying to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns for no reason.

The NRA stopped him cold, and that resulted in Mr. Obama not achieving any legislative victories during his second term.

Mr. Obama's failed presidency is the reason why the voters wanted a change and elected Mr. Trump in 2016.

You have given ZERO hard facts, the Cons have rejected reality and substituted their own.... eace

That is incorrect. It is a fact that Mr. Obama spent the entire first hundred days of his second term trying to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto long guns for no reason.

It is a fact that the NRA stopped him cold and destroyed his presidency in the process.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Target shooting, for one. "Target shooting" is listed in the very first paragraph of the Gun Control Act of 1968 as a lawful use of firearms.

The trouble is, people can target shoot with any sort of weapon, so target shooting isn't really a useful measuring stick for determining what weapons are appropriate for civilians.

Congress might claim that, but the Executive Branch doesn't have the enumerated power to make a law. Bump stocks enable bump fire. Period. Bump fire is not illegal.

Eliminating bump stocks with a law would have given the Democrats the opportunity to pass a bunch of other gun control laws at the same time.

The NRA preferred doing it with an executive order so as to not give the Democrats any opportunities to pass unconstitutional gun laws.

Boy, you really don't want to give the Democrats the key to that Pandora's Box. Anyway, Constitutionally, that doesn't matter.

The courts use Strict Scrutiny to determine whether a restriction of a fundamental right is permissible.

The degree of danger that a weapon poses is a factor in whether the government has a compelling interest in restricting access to it.

I disagree. The NRA no longer has the power to stop Joe Biden's plans if the Democrats take both Houses and the White House. We'll be dependent upon flip-flop Roberts, and that's something we would be very afraid of.

If the Democrats take total control of the government, that would be pretty bad, but the NRA would still be able to bully House Democrats in conservative districts, and NRA-friendly politicians could mount a filibuster in the Senate.

It's definitely important to get out and vote for Republicans on election day however.

During an exchange with CBS News' Nancy Cordes, Pelosi suggested that Republicans might feel such a ban would be a "slippery slope" for other gun bills. "So what?" she said, adding, "I certainly hope so."

This is why the NRA wanted to prohibit bump stocks with an executive order instead of with legislation.

 

[Glitch]

As soon as he took office, Mr. Trump signed legislation to outlaw Mr. Obama's scheme to violate people's Second Amendment rights by falsely accusing them of insanity.

Mr. Trump appoints judges and justices who vote to uphold the Second Amendment instead of voting to ignore it.

Mr. Trump has never done anything to violate the Second Amendment.

Mr. Biden will do everything he can to try to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

Mr. Biden will appoint judges and justices who will vote to ignore the Second Amendment instead of enforcing it.

I have already demonstrated, in Trump's own words, his absolute hatred for the Second Amendment. His Executive Order banning bump stocks was also a violation of the Second Amendment. Or are you not familiar with the phrase "shall not be infringed" from the Second Amendment?

Trump is as much of a threat to the US Constitution as Biden, perhaps even more. Trump has already stated that he is willing to violate the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments in order to illegally seize firearms. As I demonstrated from Trump's own mouth. What more proof of Trump's anti-Second Amendment do you need?

Ignoring reality doesn't make it go away.

 

[Rucker61]

The trouble is, people can target shoot with any sort of weapon, so target shooting isn't really a useful measuring stick for determining what weapons are appropriate for civilians.

"in common use for lawful purposes" is the appropriate measuring stick for determining what weapons are protected for civilian use. By any measure, other than a single crime, bump stocks were in common use for lawful purposes and thus protected by the Second Amendment.

Eliminating bump stocks with a law would have given the Democrats the opportunity to pass a bunch of other gun control laws at the same time.


The NRA preferred doing it with an executive order so as to not give the Democrats any opportunities to pass unconstitutional gun laws.

The Republicans held the Senate and the White House. It would have been impossible to for the Democrats to have passed any laws on gun control.
We already had a decision under Obama that the bump stock did not meet the definition of machine gun. It should have stopped right there.

The courts use Strict Scrutiny to determine whether a restriction of a fundamental right is permissible.

True enough. That wasn't the case here.

The degree of danger that a weapon poses is a factor in whether the government has a compelling interest in restricting access to it.

Interesting claim in that Caetano v Massachusetts affirmed that the relative danger of a weapon has no bearing on whether it can be banned. Bump fire isn't illegal and can be performed with string, rubber bands and belt loops. Why aren't those banned?

If the Democrats take total control of the government, that would be pretty bad, but the NRA would still be able to bully House Democrats in conservative districts, and NRA-friendly politicians could mount a filibuster in the Senate.

It's definitely important to get out and vote for Republicans on election day however.

Neither party addresses my principles in whole.

This is why the NRA wanted to prohibit bump stocks with an executive order instead of with legislation.

Again, the Republicans controlled the Senate and the White House. There was no reason to ban bump stocks at all.

 

[lurchadams]

No fear mongering. Mr. Biden really does mean to try to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.



Unfortunately that isn't true. Mr. Biden plans to nominate judges and justices who will freely ignore Heller, just as past Democratic nominees have freely ignored the Second Amendment.



If they appoint judges and justices who are willing to ignore Heller, progressives will be able to do much more than that.



It is possible to see guns both as cool toys and as tools for self defense (as well as tools for farming, hunting, and sport).



It wasn't because Mr. Trump did it. It was because bump stocks are not appropriate for self defense, and people can see that they are rather dangerous.

The NRA openly supported a ban on bump stocks before Mr. Trump did it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The only one of those things that he has actually done is the ban on bump stocks.

It is hard to see how banning bump stocks violates Heller. They are not appropriate for self defense, and they are rather dangerous. The NRA openly supported the push to outlaw bump stocks.

Mr. Trump also signed legislation that outlawed Mr. Obama's plot to take people's guns by falsely accusing them of insanity.

Mr. Trump also appointed justices who vote to uphold Heller instead of voting to ignore it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That is incorrect. Mr. Obama tried as hard as he could to violate the Second Amendment for no reason. He devoted the entire first hundred days of his second term to trying to do so. It didn't happen because the NRA defeated him and left his second term a legislative wasteland.

Mr. Biden will also try to violate the Second Amendment for no reason if he is elected. The NRA will defeat this attempt just like they defeated Mr. Obama.



The American people benefited because Mr. Obama was prevented from violating their rights.



That is incorrect. The gun manufacturers are represented by the NSSF.



Pointing out that "both Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden wish to violate the Second Amendment for no reason" is pointing out the truth.



That is only because the NRA defeated Mr. Obama's attempts to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

There was no lack of trying on Mr. Obama's part. He wrecked his second term trying to violate the Second Amendment for no reason.

His failed second term is the reason why the voters wanted a change and elected Mr. Trump in 2016.



That is incorrect. Just like Mr. Obama tried, Mr. Biden also plans to try to violate our Second Amendment rights for no reason.

You spent so much time responding to my post it would be rude not to respond. Your guns are safe. trumpublicans and the NRA are just trying to scare you in order to create another "run on guns" panic. This will be a windfall for gun and ammo manufacturers which is the trick gun nuts fall for every time a Democrat is elected president.

 

[Glitch]

You spent so much time responding to my post it would be rude not to respond. Your guns are safe. trumpublicans and the NRA are just trying to scare you in order to create another "run on guns" panic. This will be a windfall for gun and ammo manufacturers which is the trick gun nuts fall for every time a Democrat is elected president.

There has been an increase in firearm sales since Trump issued his illegal ban on bump stocks. However, firearm sales really spiked when Democrat filth began rioting and committing acts of terrorism nation-wide.

Nobody improves firearm sales than anti-American Democrat scum.

 

[Redwing]

How could this be an issue? I was told that Obama was going to take all your guns. He did do it, right? I mean, the GOP wouldn't lie for political purposes.

Thanks to republicans that understand the Constitution.
Obama Tells CNN His Greatest Regret Was Failure to Secure More Gun Control

 

[Redwing]

You spent so much time responding to my post it would be rude not to respond. Your guns are safe. trumpublicans and the NRA are just trying to scare you in order to create another "run on guns" panic. This will be a windfall for gun and ammo manufacturers which is the trick gun nuts fall for every time a Democrat is elected president.

Actually you are lost on this issue. Already, most gun stores are low on guns and completely out of ammo. Mr. Floyd did more for the gun industry in waking up democrats to the need to be able to protect themselves and their loved ones than all the Obama's and Biden's in the world.

Democrats may have over screwed themselves pushing these riots as a good thing. Every day we get new fresh faced women into our range for training and it takes just a few minutes to convert them to voting against the gun grabbing democrats.

This is usually all it takes are the words of Robert Francis O'Rourke and Creepy Uncle Joe,
Biden will confiscate guns - YouTube

followed with,
Women Against Gun Control "Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound."

 

[lurchadams]

Actually you are lost on this issue. Already, most gun stores are low on guns and completely out of ammo. Mr. Floyd did more for the gun industry in waking up democrats to the need to be able to protect themselves and their loved ones than all the Obama's and Biden's in the world.

Democrats may have over screwed themselves pushing these riots as a good thing. Every day we get new fresh faced women into our range for training and it takes just a few minutes to convert them to voting against the gun grabbing democrats.

This is usually all it takes are the words of Robert Francis O'Rourke and Creepy Uncle Joe,
Biden will confiscate guns - YouTube

followed with,
Women Against Gun Control "Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound."

It's you who need to switch off Faux News.

1. Democrats don't control the rioters
2. No one's coming for your guns.

 

[VanceMack]

Biden...guns...its...time for the remix....

 

[Glitch]

It's you who need to switch off Faux News.

1. Democrats don't control the rioters
2. No one's coming for your guns.

Many of the leftist terrorists are on the Democratic Party payroll. Kamala Harris is personally sponsoring terrorism in the US.

Kamala Harris Has Joined the Riot Bailout Program and This Only Looks Worse for Democrats

The Democratic Party also seeks to ban all privately owned firearms, as Sen. Feinstein has repeatedly stated.

There is no greater enemy the US has ever faced than the anti-American Democratic Party.

 

[lurchadams]

Many of the leftist terrorists are on the Democratic Party payroll. Kamala Harris is personally sponsoring terrorism in the US.

Kamala Harris Has Joined the Riot Bailout Program and This Only Looks Worse for Democrats

The Democratic Party also seeks to ban all privately owned firearms, as Sen. Feinstein has repeatedly stated.

There is no greater enemy the US has ever faced than the anti-American Democratic Party.

Ooooh a Redneck State article spewing wing-nut, paranoid conspiracy theories. No wonder trumpists are sitting ducks for whatever B.S. trump, brightfart, Alex Jones, QAnon, etc throws at them! Snake oil salesman and evil foreign dictators love today's trumpists!