California Rep. Eric ‘Nuke-Em’ Swalwell to Run for President on Gun Control

swalwell for president

(AP Photo/Elise Amendola) and Bigstock

You may remember California Congressman Eric Swalwell from his threat to use nukes against gun owners who refuse to give in to confiscation. He’s apparently about to announce that he’s the 139th Democrat candidate in the 2020 race for president.

Swalwell, a fourth-term congressman from Northern California who’s been involved in politics since he won a city-council seat as a college senior at the University of Maryland, is 38 years old. He has been building up to a run for months, with his staff stepping up outreach to donors in recent weeks. But the gun-control focus has developed quietly. Last week, he invited Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, to join him at an annual event with veterans at a shooting range. He tweeted a photo of himself firing at a target and one posing with Watts on the range, but made no mention of his political plans.

“It’s a true sea change in presidential politics that the candidates are competing to be the strongest on this issue, which means Americans will have a plethora of gun-sense champions to choose from,” Watts told me when I reached out to her on Wednesday. “The calculus on guns has changed, and gun safety is no longer a third rail—in fact, making this issue a priority in your policy platform is how you win. Representative Swalwell has a long track record of being good on the issue of gun safety, and we welcome him to the race.”

– Edward-Isaac Dovere in Eric Swalwell Is Running for President on Gun Safety

courtesy Twitter.com

 

comments

  1. avatar Craig in IA says:

    Another Dem in the cesspool? So what else is new. Poor people like me who live in Iowa have to put up with these whack-os trapsing back and forth across our state now for a couple of years. I’ve invited a number of them to come speak their mind at our gun shows- so far no takers.

    1. avatar It's All About The "Safety" says:

      Omg, his profile tweeter picture is of him KISSING A BABY…

      You can’t make this stuff up!

      If it was a movie no one would believe this level of propaganda. Unrealistic they would say.

  2. avatar Carl B. says:

    This creep comes off as a re-incarnated Concentration Camp Commandant and/or Child Molester. Either way he makes one’s skin crawl.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      Actually, he reminds me more of Hank from The Venture Brothers.

      1. avatar No one of consequence says:

        No, sorry, I was confusing him for Bento O’Pork.

        My bad.

    2. avatar Nanashi says:

      Well he’s the right party to have been one. Right state too.

  3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Thinking gun control is the way to take back PA, MI, OH, and WI from Trump ranks right up there with Lincoln Chafee thinking campaigning on the metric system was a path to the White House.

  4. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    You know this is the sort of Democrat Republicans own guns to protect themselves against. Just saying. I wish him luck in his candidacy. Gun control was a topic that worked out super well for Tim Kaine last time.

    1. avatar I1uluz says:

      Timmy is still one of the VA senators 🙁 Next state level election cycle VA could go from purple to dark blue due to some retiring at the end of their current term. Republicans only have one or two seat majority now. VA could be a failed state, like NJ, NY, CA, IL, etc….

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        the Dems want VA badly. All that money from DC and all those companies who moved there for the low taxes. They are basically closing the trap on the people and businesses. Importing voters and the Left migration from MD has brought it to this.

  5. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I look forward to this white Democrat explaining why he supports racist gun control laws. As he will be surrounded as they always are by private armed security guards.

    He can always ask Rosie O’Donnell for advice on this issue.

    Or perhaps he has a 38 revolver hidden away somewhere just as Senator Dianne Feinstein does.

    1. avatar Draven says:

      She doesn’t just have a .38, she also has (or had) a .380, at least according to her CCW permit issued by San Fran.

      1. avatar MB says:

        @Draven. California has calibers of guns you own on CCW permit??? That’s F’ed up. So technically they have full blown gun registration in Kommiefornia….

        1. avatar Draven says:

          CA requires you list the firearms you will be carrying on your permit. You have to amend the permit if you buy or sell the guns.

          And yes, CA has had handgun registration since – well, i dunno, it was law the entire time i was there…. and added long guns in 2015.

        2. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          Lol. NYC not only has the make and model on the permit, but the specific serial number for each firearm owned. And there’s a limit (I forget how many, but it was max of like 4 or 5, only) on how many could be listed on the permit. This was a while ago when I first got mine, so things may have changed since the early 90’s. I’ve since moved to minneapolis where it’s substantially more free.

        3. avatar MB says:

          @Draven, @Son. Thanks guys. Learn something new everyday if you speak to the right people. I moved from R. I. to Texas, getting Texas LTC was not a challenge like in R. I. I guess N. J. and Illinois are as bad as Ca and N.Y. In Texas you can carry almost anything except a tomahawk for some reason.

        4. avatar Keep on a Glockin' me baby says:

          @TrueBornSonOfLiberty: Minneapolis isn”t very free: “Minnesota Statutes, section 97B.045, prohibits transporting a firearm in a motor
          vehicle unless the firearm is unloaded and either (1) fully secured in a gun case
          expressly made for that purpose, where the case is zipped, snapped, buckled, tied,
          or otherwise fastened, or (2) in the closed trunk of the motor vehicle. Minnesota
          law does not require that the gun case be locked. ”

          Minnesota Does Not Honor Permits from these States:
          Alabama, American Samoa, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, N. Mariana Islands, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virgin Islands, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming

          When I travel to MN for business (which I try to avoid if at all possible), as a law-abiding citizen, I have to stop at the border and disarm. That’s not freedom.

      2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        Draven
        Your correct statement should read “I Draven, believe Senator Feinstein when she tells me she doesn’t have a 38 revolver”

        Liberal FUDDs like you can believe her Bull Sh#t. I do not. After SF mayor Moscone and Supervisor Milk were murdered in a gun free zone she helped create, she made a big public show of getting rid of her handgun. Less than a year later she SECRETLY PURCHASED another handgun. Because she was getting death threats.

        Her house front windows were shot out. And bomb was planted at her front door. But it failed to explode. All during this time bombs were exploding all over northern california. And political leaders were being killed or shot at.

        Electricity was out of service many times back then because of the terrorist group New Liberation Front, bombed electrical sub station. They were the ones who tried to kill Feinstein.

        New World Liberation Front (NWLF)
        https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/nwlf.htm

        Please continue to make excuses for Feinstein, Swalwell, or Tom Ammiano, the racist gay state senator, and ex cop, who publicly endorsed to Mulford Act. And wrote the law making stalking, rape victims, and everyone else, wait an extra ten days to get a gun.

        Dianne Feinstein is a hypocrite pig.

        Feinstein’s gun-packing history
        https://blog.sfgate.com/djsaunders/2013/03/21/feinsteins-gun-packing-history/

        ps
        I grew up in Sacramento. I was there when our electricity was bombed out of service.

        1. avatar Draven says:

          I’m not a liberal FUDD, and i have no idea where you got that impression.

  6. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    I’m sure there some Marxist morons that will swallow Swalwell’s Bravo Sierra but president,Spartacus or Camel Harris will slay him,pun intended.

  7. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    Make no mistake, The Revolutionary War started over 2 issues:
    “Higher Taxes” (no, it wasn’t “no taxation without representation”, as the colonists were always taxed and didn’t result in rebellion. It only became untenable once the taxes got too high)
    And
    “Gun Control”- the British army marched to Concorde and attempted to seize the powder stores and arms. The first shots of the war were fired shortly after.
    Now, what present day, tyrannical party has “higher taxes” and “gun control” as official policies listed on their party platform?
    Clean and oil your rifles, folks. Prepare to fight against the democrat terrorists and their “War of Leftist Aggression”.

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      “Gun Control”- the British army marched to Concorde and attempted to seize the powder stores and arms. The first shots of the war were fired shortly after.”

      The Shot Heard Round The World !

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        I can still hear it. How about you?!?!?!?

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        The Brits would have no opposition today. They would roll over like NZ

        1. avatar Southern Cross says:

          The Maori fought the British so well they eventually had a peace treaty. The descendants of the Maori are now refusing to hand over their guns.

    2. avatar Aaron Walker says:

      That’s why THEIR creating “Red Flag Laws” to eliminate YOUR constitutional rights,(turning them into governmental privileges , prevent rebellion, legitimize THEIR authority, squash dissent, declare citizens enemies of the state, etc…

  8. avatar No one of consequence says:

    I welcome this. Although, sitting back and munching on the popcorn isn’t doing much good for my waistline.

    I am now registered to vote Democrat just so I can vote in the primaries. Oh, who to pick, who to pick, who’s the wackiest in the lineup? For now, that is…

  9. avatar MB says:

    This Bozo Eric Swalwell has less chance of being elected President than I do getting to walking on the moon…How does this moron feed himself and tie his shoes in the morning?

  10. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    What guns are the allowed to shoot at their gun control approved range session? Why didn’t they invite the NRA or GOA since they are gun experts? “Revolvers and single shot rifles only please.”

    I wonder what sort of vets joined them, the military brass sorts “I am an army general, I can tell you no civilian should have a AR, it is a military weapon of war just like my tanks.”

    1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      Looked at the photo, would he love to shoot with an approved 20rds a month ration and $10 ammo background check? Oh wait, he loves to shoot probably police owned guns at a private setting with probably police owned ammo… Yes, politicians will be shooting with their body guards and the brute squad with their nifty gun control exemptions, power is cool, you get to shoot all the fun stuff for free, and oppress your opposition.

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      An argument could be made the police have no business with tanks, MRAPs, full auto, drones, bombs, etc when they are supposed to be in a defensive position ( got to go home at the shift end) rather than an offensive position looking to take territory.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        Unless the cops live in a guarded and gated compound, and are bussed in via armed convoy, the police officers will still be vulnerable at home or in transit.

  11. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    “Authoritarianism…Enuff said….”

  12. avatar JDH says:

    Douche Nuke-em.

    1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      Now that is funny!

    2. avatar napresto says:

      Classic

  13. avatar A Deplorable says:

    The fact Swalwell would Tweet such a remark, even in some sort of idiot’s jest, proves he’s dangerously insane and totally unfit for any political office, particularly that of POTUS. Needs a Nuke Violence Restraining Order filed against him immediately!

    1. avatar edward kenway's ghost says:

      Dangerously unhinged yet elected, which means many agree with him because he still sits in public office.
      This won’t end well if he is ( or if they are) given more money and power which is exactly why the fools want a simple democracy, an end to the electoral vote, and weapons bans.
      Prepare accordingly, it’s what they want.

  14. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    With the Dem’s platform that white, male straight, cisgendered, Christians are inherently evil and the enemy why are so many running? Didn’t they get the memo?

  15. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Representative Swalwell has a long track record of being good on the issue of gun safety … – Edward-Isaac Dovere

    I am always amused when Progressives and gun-grabbers (but I repeat myself) push the “gun safety” angle — claiming that they advocate for “safe” gun ownership. Of course that really means we would only be able to own single-shot muzzleloaders which are always unloaded and always locked in a storage container.

    The reality is that just about anything is dangerous if people abuse it. Note that murderers have even used pillows to murder people. Any efforts to neuter firearms will not affect determined murderers. What those efforts will do, however, is severely hamper our ability to throw-off tyranny, which is the real reason why Progressives want to eliminate firearms. After all, it is much harder to take 50 percent (or more) of people’s money and imprison political enemies if they have effective firearms.

  16. avatar Michael says:

    Bring it on, Bozo. Just don’t be sendin’ anybody you’ll miss. And while you’re at it, ask hillary how that worked out for her.

  17. avatar Shire-man says:

    People who hate us want to lord over us and hope to do so campaigning on a platform to get rid of us.
    What could possible go wrong?

  18. avatar GS650G says:

    Definitely going to be a front runner. No way the politically correct hyphenated and female candidates will stand a chance against this guy. A shoo in.

    Sure.

  19. avatar RA-15 says:

    Eric swallowed what , I missed it ?

  20. avatar Darkman says:

    Looking to get another participation trophy. It seems that either all these democrats are seriously deranged or they are just seeking the limelight. Everyone thought the republican race was a circus in the 2016 cycle. I suggest you get your comfy chair and snacks ready. This is going to be fun. Watching all these fools trying to one up each other with the free be’s. All the while trying to discredit their opponents. Every ism on the books will be played. All the while President Trump @2020 will be having a hay day playing one against the other. Let the games begin.

  21. avatar former water walker says:

    Hmmm…mebbe Swallowell and Occasional-Cortex should get together. Yeah that’s the ticket😄And change the constitution while yer at it😏

  22. avatar NORDNEG says:

    Nothing good ever comes out of California,,, Build a wall around the whole state,,, I really wish the BIG one would happen & save what’s left of America.

    1. avatar Gregg says:

      Whatever happened to Bob Dornan. He was a firebrand for the good guys.

  23. avatar matt says:

    “The calculus on guns has changed, and gun safety is no longer a third rail—in fact, making this issue a priority in your policy platform is how you win.”

    https://youtu.be/_n5E7feJHw0

  24. avatar PATRON49IFT says:

    Anyone who ever paid any attention to history should be reminded that the first thing authoritarian governments do is disarm the public. For their safety, of course. Nazi Germany, Russia and later Soviet Union, China and on and on back through history. It usually starts with small steps; licensing requirements, registration of firearms, magazine capacity limits and other seemingly innocent sounding steps. Promoted as steps to gun safety for our own protection. Then come the harsher enforcement measures; arrest and jail for non-compliance. During the Nazi period it finally got to the point of house to house searches (locations determined by the aforementioned gun registrations) for firearms. If any were found in a home, the homeowner was summarily executed on the spot. Of course if anyone tried to interfere, family or whatever, they got the same.

    We keep telling ourselves (most of us) that it will never happen here. Are we sure? Do we want to take that chance? When, at what point will the real push-back on this kind of government sanctioned aggression against us, begin? What form will it take? I hope I’m wrong but I fear that in my lifetime there will be fighting in the streets among the gun rights folks and those who would take away those rights at the point of a gun be it law enforcement types or other citizens banding together. Again, I hope I’m wrong.

    I personally think we who believe in a strong second amendment should push back hard at every opportunity. I don’t think we should accept the argument of those on the left. I disagree with their premise that the second amendment is outdated and should somehow be changed. I will not argue defensively from that position. My position is that the second amendment is located at the number two position in the Bill of Rights because the founders knew it was that important. Which other amendments are we comfortable eliminating or changing? The first, the fourth, the fifth? I think not!

    If we want our country in 50 years to resemble our country now, we better get serious about defeating those who disagree with us and would take away our rights. I say stop trying to convince the other side we are not Nazi’s or monsters or white supremicists or racists or whatever. Stop being defensive about our beliefs. They are the ones who are out of touch. I say defeat them at every opportunity; at the ballot box if possible and in conversations personally when necessary. We must protect our rights, as Malcom X said, “By any means necessary.”

    1. avatar Michael says:

      Armed resistance will come, as always, from behind every blade of grass. These fools think that it’s gonna’ be door to door. Read up on some of the tactics and strategy being used in the Balkans. The best deterrent to urban agression is just to leave the dead bodies to rot where they fall. Stray dogs need love too. another bulldog mouth with a puppydog butt. F-K-A

    2. avatar hgc says:

      I fear it is way past that point and the cards are stacked. Demonrat agendas, incl. Const. revisions, rinos, main stream media all combine with Law Enforcement to shame ownership or possession.
      All 2A’s that resist or become a peg sticking up high enough to be “visible” will become future “News at 6 and 11” as they one by one, are smeared as “just another example” of why back ground checks don’t work and cracks allow mental cases to slip thru.
      Any Means Necessary, to shift the co-witness to their target.
      Trump, for now has kept the lid on chit, but when his term (s) end, the SHTF.
      No matter how any of this goes, there will be civil unrest then civil war. My grandfather, in early 60”s told me “one day, there will be troops in the streets, shooting Americans. He said ” You may not live to see it, but your children will.” Never knew him to be incorrect.
      This could be a first. Just sayin…

  25. avatar Mad says:

    Armed and ready

  26. avatar raptor jesus says:

    GUNS DEMAND ACTION FOR MOM SENSE IN AMERICA!

  27. avatar JOHN B THAYER says:

    Their are two stealth candidates in the Democrat presidential race who are coming up fast on the outside.

    They are:

    Michael Avenatti and Jussie Smollett.

    I strongly endorse them as the Democrat party’s candidates for P.O.T.U.S. and V.P.O.T.U.S.

    ABSOLUTELY I DO!

  28. avatar WI Patriot says:

    SS, DD…liberals are some of the most hateful, violent individual there are…just another D.C. kb warrior…

  29. avatar barnbwt says:

    I can’t yet tell if the DNC primary field is more The Island of Misfit Toys or the Thunderdome…but I *really* hope it’s the latter

  30. avatar IAmNotTheHulk says:

    Eric Swallow?

  31. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    Un-American pig!

  32. avatar Jawjuh says:

    Me? I think maybe he’s playing the long game. Get his name out there for recognition. He knows he’s not going to get nominated…this time.

  33. avatar Rocketman says:

    The ONLY reason that civilians don’t have nukes as well as main battle tanks, F-15 Eagles loaded with cluster bombs and sidewinder missiles is because the federal government has deemed them illegal so the comment that “Their legit” is totally bogus.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      And the other reason is the cost so much not only to buy but also to maintain.

  34. avatar Slow Joe Crow says:

    I look forward to the Democratic primary, when I get to vote for the most extreme unelectable whack jobs.

  35. avatar Hannibal says:

    I suspect that any male who tries to run for the Democratic Party’s presidential primary this cycle will get a “me-too” DQ. Most of them probably deserve it.

  36. avatar Patrick says:

    Hey guys, it’s not that I’m going soft on the guy or whatever, but I really don’t think he was threatening to use nuclear weapons on gun owners. Obviously, doing so would likely also mean using nuclear weapons on non-gun owners, etc. I think his point was that you can’t resist a powerful military with just rifles.

    I agree that he is completely wrong, not just on the subject in general, but on the “nuclear weapon argument” specifically. Such weapons are used as threats between nations, not in enforcing compliance of one’s own citizens. Using nuclear weapons on one’s own taxpayers, even for a tyrant, just doesn’t seem to be profitable.
    Yes, I do think small arms resist tyranny. Tyranny is not military invasion of land, but control over people that requires one-on-one interactions, and a willing police/military.
    So yes, this guy used a common bad argument, but I really don’t think he was “threatening to nuke gun owners”. It just seems like a red herring, especially when his argument is so flawed anyway.

    And about his use of the word “sarcasm”, though I may be repeating myself, I don’t feel that he was being sarcastic as in a form of rhetoric; I think he really was trying to make an argument about the anti-tyrannical use of small arms. I think by calling it sarcasm, he was diverting attention away from the argumentative nature of the statement. Maybe he saw that others understand the argument’s flaw. So there’s another issue with the guy.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email