Democrat Gun Control Cartoon

Trump camp hits one year as discussion turns to guns

Trump walking a fine line by hinting at gun policy change?

TRUMP CAMP HITS ONE YEAR AS THE DISCUSSION TURNS TO GUNS
One year ago today, Donald Trump descended from the glass escalator in Trump Tower to announce his presidential launch. At the time, Jeb Bush and his much rumored big-money super PAC was going to clobber all other Republican hopefuls with maybe a challenge from young Sen. Marco Rubio or popular Gov. Scott Walker.
Ha!
On Day 365 of Trump’s bid, another new poll (taken before the deadly shootings in Orlando) puts Hillary Clinton on top of Trump by 6 points. My, this is a far, far cry from the pre-convention general election scenario Republicans envisioned a year ago.
It is especially true for party conservatives, as their now presumptive nominee hints at a new stance on a core issue for Republican voters: gun rights.
On Wednesday, Trump said that he’d like to discuss with the National Rifle Association, which has already endorsed him, the possibility of preventing gun sales to those on the government’s terror watch list. This coincides with legislation proposed by Senate Democrats that would put such a measure in place, a measure which the NRA has already opposed on the grounds that it gives the government too much power over people who haven’t even been charged with a crime.
Some Senate Republicans, however, seem more open to the possibility of restricting gun sales to those suspected of terrorist ties, but the implementation of the Republican-led ban is much different than what Democrats have proposed.
Although they agree those on the terror watch list should not be sold weapons, Republicans believe that in order to justify not selling the firearm the government must provide evidence for why the sale could not go through within 72 hours.
In the past, Trump has shown openness to banning assault weapons and imposing a waiting period on gun sales. But similar to his switch on abortion, another crucial GOP issue, Trump has fully embraced the Second Amendment right since entering the presidential race.
Trump said at his rally in Atlanta on Wednesday, “By the way, I’m going to save your Second Amendment,” after arguing that if someone else in the Orlando nightclub had a firearm other than the shooter the devastation wouldn’t have been as severe.
Where Trump ultimately comes down on the issue remains to be seen, as his only mention so far was in a single tweet. If he supports a measure on a restriction akin to that proposed by the Democrats and strongly opposed by the NRA however, it would mean a big break with his core constituents and the party as a whole.
And for a man who relies heavily on polling to make his decisions, Trump will find no help here. The country has been split for years: a Gallup survey of recent polling on gun issues shows that there is always a slight uptick in favor of restrictions immediately after a mass shooting followed by a dip as time goes on.
Republicans will have to wait and see how Trump decides to proceed, but it’s a sure bet that one year ago today the party never thought they’d face a possible challenge on a key issue from their own party’s candidate. Or that the candidate in question would be the man descending from the glass escalator.

Ryan, top Republicans urge caution on post-Orlando gun control measures

Donald Trump's gun control politics spark controversy

House Speaker Paul Ryan and other top Republicans pushed back Thursday on growing calls from Democrats to ban people on terror watch lists from buying guns, even as Donald Trump and other GOP figures opened the door to discussing it.
Calls for action have increased in the wake of the terror massacre at Pulse nightclub in Orlando that left 50 people, including the gunman, dead on Sunday. The gunman, Omar Mateen, had been on a watch list for 10 months before being removed.
“We want to make sure that something like this doesn't happen again. Everybody wants that," Ryan told reporters Thursday. "But as we look at how to proceed, we also want to make sure that we're not infringing upon people's legitimate constitutional rights. That's important.”
Ryan's comments come a day after Trump indicated potential support for new gun laws in this area.
“I will be meeting with the N.R.A., who has endorsed me, about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no-fly list, to buy guns,” the presumptive GOP presidential nominee tweeted Wednesday.
Whether Trump would support an outright ban or just a delay for gun sales for those on watch lists is not clear.
That is the sticking point right now in the Senate.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Democrats are pushing a measure to ban those on no-fly lists from purchasing weapons.
But Republicans worry about such a measure infringing on gun rights for someone wrongly included on such a list.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has a dueling measure to delay a gun sale for 72 hours, but require prosecutors to go to court to show probable cause if they want to block the sale permanently.
Cornyn’s bill has been backed by the NRA.
Meanwhile, Republican Sens. Charles Grassley, of Iowa, and Ted Cruz, of Texas, have a measure that would notify law enforcement if anyone investigated for terrorism in the last five years tries to buy a gun -- in addition to making other changes.
Democrats drew more attention to their version of the legislation Wednesday night as Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., held the floor along with colleagues in a nearly 15-hour filibuster that lasted into the early hours Thursday.
"We can't just wait, we have to make something happen," said Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., at an emotional news conference where Democrats joined family members of people killed in the nation's recent mass shootings. "These are people bound by brutality, and their numbers are growing."
But Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., blasted Murphy's filibuster as a "campaign talk-a-thon" that did nothing but delay potential votes.
Cruz also slammed Democrats, saying on the Senate floor the Democrat effort was nothing more than a political distraction that avoided the real issues.
“I find it ridiculous that in response to an ISIS terror attack, the Democrats go on high dudgeon that we've got to restrict the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens,” Cruz said. “This is not a gun control issue, this is a terrorism issue.”
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called Cornyn's bill a "wolf in sheep's clothing" and said it would allow "every terrorist to get a gun." Clinton's spokesman, Brian Fallon, called Cornyn's bill a "smokescreen."
Cornyn responded angrily.
"That's an incredibly ignorant thing for her to say," Cornyn said. "That anybody can be denied their constitutional rights without due process of law and without the government coming forward and establishing probable cause, that's simply un-American."
A possible bipartisan compromise was proposed by Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa. Toomey said Wednesday his bill would prevent potential terrorists from getting a gun, while providing an extra layer of due process that the Democratic bill lacks.
“I have drafted legislation that takes the best features from both of the previous proposals, effectively preventing terrorists from being able to purchase guns, while also safeguarding the rights of innocent Americans who are mistakenly put on the list,” Toomey said.

Meanwhile, the Justice Department backed a ban on gun sales to those on watch lists.
“The amendment gives the Justice Department an important additional tool to prevent the sale of guns to suspected terrorists by licensed firearms dealers while ensuring protection of the department’s operational and investigative sensitivities," a DOJ official said in a statement.
The DOJ’s stance is a departure from past warnings from FBI Director James Comey, who reportedly has said a ban could alert terrorists they are being investigated.
Ryan cited those remarks when talking to reporters.
“As the FBI director just told us the other day, and I think he said this publicly, if we do this wrong, like the president is proposing, we can actually blow our ongoing terrorist investigations. So, we want to get this right, so that we don't undermine terrorist investigations,” Ryan said.

Alleged DNC oppo file casts Trump as 'misogynist in chief'

People claiming to have hacked the Democratic National Committee have released what they say is the party's playbook for running against Donald Trump.
The over 200 pages of purported opposition research aimed at the "divisive and dangerous" Trump surfaced just days after Russian hackers breached DNC databases. The "Donald Trump Report" was created on Dec. 19, before Trump even won his first primary.
Gawker obtained the documents. A Romanian hacker named "Gucifer 2.0" claimed credit, saying this was just "one of the many thousands" of documents acquired through hacking the DNC.
The contents include many familiar lines of attack, including Trump's controversial remarks, past failed business deals, "dangerous" political policies and attitudes toward women.

'Hell No!' Cashier refuses to serve Trump backers

Riggs, (l.), and Wolfrey, (r.), just wanted a burger, but got a side of partisanship.

Shannon Riggs and her cousins were famished after attending a Donald Trump rally last week in Richmond, Va., so they decided to drop by Cook Out – a regional restaurant chain known for its tasty burgers.
The group was decked out in Trump swag – from T-shirts to those iconic red hats emblazoned with the campaign’s slogan: “Make America Great Again.”
Click here to join Todd’s American Dispatch: a must-read for conservatives!
But apparently the cashier at the Cook Out in Colonial Heights does not believe Trump can make America great again. Nor do they believe his supporters deserve to eat Cook Out hamburgers.
Riggs explained what happened during the June 10 incident to television station WTVR.
“As soon as we got to the window, someone inside said ‘Hell no! I’m not serving them,’” she recounted.

2016 Election Headquarters

The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →

They were denied service simply for being Trump supporters!
“You should not be discriminated (against) based on who you support, whether it be for Bernie, Hillary or Mr. Trump,” Ms Riggs told the television station.
Click here to get a signed copy of Todd’s latest book - primer on how to restore traditional American values!
The folks at Cook Out disputed the notion that they denied the family service. A company spokesperson told me the manager on duty “immediately had someone else take the customer’s order.”
But while the family waited for their order – they said other workers laughed at them. Disgusted, they demanded a refund and left the restaurant.
“Once you witness discrimination first hand, it’s a totally different experience,” 16-year-old Lauren Wolfrey told the television station. “I was in a state of shock.
“They had this sense of anger,” she added. “They were just really rude to us.”
Cook Out conceded the employee violated their policy on rudeness.
“The manager on duty apologized and granted the customer a refund,” the spokesperson said. “The employee that was rude was immediately terminated per policy.”
The folks at Cook Out tell me they gladly feed everybody regardless of political affiliation – Republican or Democrat.
“This was an isolated action of a single person and does not represent the principles on which Cook Out operates,” the spokesperson told me. “To deny anyone from eating at one of our restaurants would never cross our mind and of course, would be totally ludicrous.”
Now had this been an isolated incident -- it would not be all that newsworthy. But there is a very disturbing pattern emerging this political season.
Trump supporters have been consistently and methodically bullied and intimidated - beaten and bloodied.
Remember what happened in San Jose, Calif., – when an angry mob brutally assaulted and terrorized his fans?
The effort to silence supporters of Donald Trump is not just outrageous. It’s unconstitutional. It’s un-American.
And it's a mighty sad day in these great United States when a person can't order a hamburger without getting a side of partisanship.

Obama Cartoons

After Orlando, Obama drops most partisan speech ever

Tuesday, our president came to us live from the Treasury Department. Allegedly, the purpose was to update Americans on the horrific Islamist terrorist attack at an LGBT club in Florida, as well as offer an update in the war against ISIS. But Obama reserved the second half of the speech for a vicious partisan diatribe. It would be as if FDR, partway through his “Day of Infamy” speech, began bashing Republicans for not supporting lend-lease.
The first sign that the president’s remarks were headed south came when he lapsed into yet another tired attempt to link effective counterterrorism with the debate on gun control.  Hijacking a tragedy to press a political agenda, however, is pure opportunism.
The Orlando attack is as much about a mass shooting as 9/11 was about a plane crash.
Terrorists use all kinds of weapons to kill. If government banned everything that can be used to kill people in great numbers, we would all have to live in empty rubber rooms.  Childproofing the world to make us safe from terrorists is not a responsible strategy.
If Obama wanted to debate gun control, and not look like a partisan hack, he would have chosen another time to make his case, and he would have started with the facts.
He could begin by explaining why data from Pew Research Center, the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention find that gun violence is at a 30-year low, even as gun ownership in America has expanded.
Obama saved his greatest invectives for attacking anyone who criticized him for not naming the enemy — and anyone using the term “radical Islam.” In the most superficial way, he is right. Mouthing those words doesn’t shift the calculus of war any more than calling the German war machine Nazis got GIs up the cliffs at Normandy.
But Obama’s verbal assault was pure bait and switch. What has Americans really upset is not whether he mouths particular words, but the belief that the debate over words reflects a deeper concern. Their concern is that Obama is not prosecuting a winning war. He ignores the fact that his counterterrorism strategy has been off course since 2010.
Worse, Obama implied that disagreeing was “un-American” and anti-Muslim. He ignored the fact that many who use the term “radical Islam” add the qualifier “radical” to differentiate the Islamist threat from the global Muslim community.
By labeling his detractors racist and know-nothings, he simply reinforces what many Americans already believe:  Obama is divider, not a uniter. 

The enemy is radical Islam, not the National Rifle Association

Over the past eight years - the Obama administration has never let a crisis go to waste. The Orlando terrorist attack was no different.
President Obama co-opted an Islamic radical terrorist attack and turned it into a campaign to ban “assault rifles” (their words, not mine).
Click here to join Todd’s American Dispatch: a must-read for conservatives!
“We have to make it harder for people who want to kill Americans to get their hands on weapons of war that let them kill dozens of innocents,” the president declared.
So does he plan on confiscating our pressure cookers? What about fertilizer or cutlery or jetliners? Would that make us safer?
“Enough talking about being tough on terrorism,” the president said in a lecture to the nation on Tuesday. “Actually be tough on terrorism, and stop making it easy as possible for terrorists to buy assault weapons.”
Click here to get Todd’s latest book! It’s your primer on how to restore traditional American values!
If the president really wanted to be tough on terrorism, he would actually acknowledge the real enemy and he would stop making it easy for the jihadists to cross our borders.
“Reinstate the assault weapons ban,” he demanded. “Make it harder for terrorists to use these weapons to kill us.”
How about making sure Americans have the tools necessary to defend themselves and their families against the jihadists? How about you stop being an apologist for the Islamists – and start being a Commander-in-Chief for the United States?
The mainstream media has been more than willing to take up the president's cause.
The New York Daily News leading the charge with a front page headline blaming the National Rifle Association for the Orlando massacre.
In today's edition - they accused NRA members of being traitors. Traitors.
“Thanks, NRA. Because of your continued opposition to an assault rifle ban, terrorists like this lunatic can legally buy a killing machine and perpetrate the worst mass shooing in U.S. history,” another headline screamed.
Can you believe people actually read this garbage?
The anti-gun crowd has become unhinged. Truth is, most of them would not be able to tell the difference between an AR-15 and a Super Soaker.
They do not understand this central truth: the Second Amendment protects all of the other Amendments.
What happened in Orlando was the work of a jihadist - not a law-abiding NRA member. It was an Islamic radical who slaughtered those people -- not a deer hunter.
Chris Cox, the executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, summed it up nicely in a USA Today editorial:
“It’s time for us to admit that radical Islam is a hate crime waiting to happen. The only way to defeat them is to destroy them – not destroy the right of law-abiding Americans to defend ourselves.”
The enemy is radical Islam, folks -- not the NRA.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.