They told us….

Click here to view original web page at

....that if conservatives didn't hop aboard the "Trump train" during the 2016 campaign that the next president would be coming for Americans' guns.

And they were right.

In 2016, NRA-endorsed Republican candidate Donald Trump won the presidency after many months of insisting that his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton was going to grab your guns.

In February 2018, President Trump publicly called for a subversion of due process, and for the government to “take the guns first.”

During a televised meeting with lawmakers at the White House on Wednesday afternoon, the president and assembled legislators spent the hour riffing on ideas for securing schools and curtailing gun violence in America. Trump ping-ponged between various policy positions and postures, invariably making unforced interjections that would make his staunchest pro-gun supporters cringe.

When Vice President Mike Pence talked about how those who are a “danger to themselves or others” should have their firearms taken away, but also afforded due process, the president jumped in to one-up Pence.

“Or, Mike, take the firearms first, and then go to court,” Trump said, breaking with his own vice president on live TV. “Because that's another system. Because a lot of times, by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court, to get the due process procedures.”

So Trumpkins, lemme ask ya. Is this another one of those situations where we take him "seriously, not literally?"

What I find most amusing about this latest incident is that some Democrats in their knee-jerk "RESISTANCE!" declare they're outraged (OUTRAGED, I tell ya) over Trump's apparent willingness to skirt around the Constitution by denying due process. The reason being is these leftist frauds were willing to do basically the same thing by denying a citizen his/her Second Amendment rights if they appeared on an arbitrary "watch list." Don't get me wrong here. I agree in principle with the Dems who hit back at Trump over his wanting to subvert due process, but recent history indicates they're being incredibly disingenuous.

Given I had the expectation of Mrs. Clinton being elected president in 2016, my focus was ensuring the GOP had one if not both chambers of Congress to act as a check on the White House. Turns out that sentiment is just as relevant with a Republican currently occupying the Oval Office.