Lawyers for the family with whom accused shooter Nikolas Cruz had been living released text messages they received from the shooter moments before the massacre occurred, and they paint a chilling picture of what happened that fateful Valentine’s Day.

Attorney Jim Lewis represents the Snead family, in whose home the shooter was living at the time of the Stoneman Douglas High School massacre.

Lewis passed the documents to The Palm Beach Post on Wednesday, the same day that a grand jury indicted the shooter on 34 counts, 17 counts of premeditated first-degree murder for those who were killed and 17 counts of premeditated first-degree attempted murder for those he allegedly wounded.

According to The Post, the texts began at about 2 p.m., when the shooter “texted the Sneads’ teenage son, who was in class at Douglas, around 2 p.m., about 20 minutes before the shooting began.

“Cruz asked what class the son was in and who the teacher was. The son said the teacher was one of the coaches. Cruz texted the son to ask the coach if he remembered Cruz. The coach was not one of the people Cruz shot.”

“Minutes later, Cruz texted to say he was going to a movie. Lewis said he then ‘made some kind of comment that, ‘I’ve got something big to tell you.” When the son pressed him, Cruz texted, ‘no big deal. Nothing bad.’

“Lewis said the texting stopped at 2:18 p.m. The last text was a single word: ‘Yo.’ The Snead teen texted back several times without a response. Then, the shooting started.”

“There was nothing to give any clue that this was about to happen,” Lewis said.

“No bad feelings about anybody’s school. No bad feelings about Douglas in general.”

However, more details began to emerge that again looked an awful lot like red flags. The accused shooter and his brother were left orphaned after their adopted mother died last November of pneumonia.

The two moved in with family friend Roxanne Deschamps, who kicked Cruz out when he refused to get rid of his guns. That’s why he eventually moved in with the Sneads.

Lewis also revealed that James Snead had asked the school, which had expelled Cruz, whether he could re-enroll. The school said no.

However, the chilling takeaway from the tweets is just how blasé that Cruz was before he allegedly perpetrated one of the most heinous crimes of recent years.

RELATED: Father of Parkland Victim Unleashes Brutal Attack on Mainstream Media: “Today It’s Not About Guns”

Yet, this all didn’t have to happen. If law enforcement had done its job — either at the federal or at the local level — this shooting could have been stopped or mitigated.

We’ll likely find out more in the coming days, weeks and months, but there’s almost nothing that could change that fact, that none of this had to happen if people would have just done their job.

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree.

What are your thoughts on these texts? Scroll down to comment below!

Democrats trying to ride the #MeToo movement to a blue wave in November just hit a major snag.

After a failed presidential candidate ran on an “I’m with her” slogan, and amid nationwide revulsion over seemingly endless revelations of sexual misconduct by powerful men (overwhelmingly liberals) against women, the setup for a Democrat midterm campaign aimed at turning out liberal women in huge numbers seemed set.

But now comes the most infamous White House intern in history to remind America how badly that “I’m with her” candidate treated a woman who’d been preyed on – and how the Democratic Party really feels about women who come between the party and political power.

In a 3,500-word essay for Vanity Fair this month, former White House intern/Bill Clinton paramour Monica Lewinsky offered a new take on her side of the scandal that convulsed the country and nearly drove the 42nd president from office.

And even for conservatives who remember the late 1990s, it’s a reminder of the horrific treatment Lewinsky received at Bill Clinton’s hands. Lewinsky called her affair with Bill Clinton a “gross abuse of power” and alluded to the way Hillary Clinton and fellow Democrats tried to smear her as an “unstable stalker.” She noted that the road to the affair was “littered with inappropriate abuse of authority, station, and privilege. (Full stop.)”

“Now, at 44, I’m beginning (just beginning) to consider the implications of the power differentials that were so vast between a president and a White House intern,” she wrote. “I’m beginning to entertain the notion that in such a circumstance the idea of consent might well be rendered moot.”

And every one of those words shows that Democrats are lying when they claim to be the party that protects women.

For liberals — even for the ones too young to remember the 1990s personally — the Clinton years are what the party aspires to be. And the Clinton machine — the one that rigged the 2016 primary to ensure Hillary’s victory — won’t have it any other way.

Hillary was supposed to have been the one who stood up for women’s rights, particularly when she delivered a famous speech in China (The New York Times called it a hint of Clinton’s future presidential run).

She built her campaign around the whole “first woman president” idea, making much of her ability to break the “glass ceiling” of being the first woman to win the nomination of a major party for president. (Former Republican presidential contender Carly Fiorina took that claim apart in an interview just as the 2016 Democratic National Convention was getting started.)

And in 2018, Democrats are planning to use the women’s issue again in midterm elections to try to cripple the presidency of Donald Trump.

But Lewinsky’s essay is going to be a reminder of just what the Democratic Party was willing to do on Bill Clinton’s behalf in the 1990s, when he looked America in the eye on television and talked about a young White House intern like she was a two-dollar streetwalker in Little Rock.

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky,” Clinton said in televised address in January 1998, wagging his finger for emphasis.

RELATED: Kathy Griffin Posts Delusional ‘International Women’s Day’ Photo That Backfires Big Time

Well, “that woman” remembered it differently. And she was in the unfortunate position to know. (One of her dresses was in an unfortunate position too, as it turned out.)

But Democrats locked arms to protect Clinton then, and Hillary famously branded the young Lewinsky a “narcissistic loony toon.”

Lewinsky was a threat to their political power then, and Clinton-machine Democrats are ruthless when it comes to threats to their power — as Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Wiley can all confirm.

Lewinsky’s essay is a reminder of just how badly Democrats treat women who get in the way of their agenda.

All the posturing in the world isn’t going to change that — and let’s hope the 2018 midterms prove it.

Like and share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you agree that the Clintons should pay the price for what they allegedly did to Monica Lewinsky.

What do you think Lewisnky’s essay will remind Americans of? Scroll down to comment below!

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders opened Friday’s press conference by contrasting massive manufacturing jobs losses under Obama to the nearly three million U.S. jobs added since Donald Trump was elected President.

Sanders pointed to Obama-era manufacturing job losses of 1,000 each month, but said that since President Donald Trump was elected the U.S. had added 275,000 manufacturing jobs.

February jobs numbers released earlier in the day revealed a much higher than anticipated job creation total of 313,000. Before the numbers came out, estimates sat at around 200,000 for non-farm job increases.

She then credited Trump-era tax cuts and deregulation for acting as a driver to the nearly three million new jobs added.

“The federal government is getting out of the way and the American people are innovating, building, and creating jobs,” said Sanders.

Industries leading in jobs increases were construction, retail and business services, manufacturing, finance, healthcare, and mining. Jobs total reports for December and January were also revised upward.

The February jobs numbers represented the highest gain in a year and a half, according to MarketWatch.

The news comes the same week that Trump made tariffs of 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum official. The decision brought both praise and criticism. Canada and Mexico have been temporarily exempted from the tariffs pending NAFTA negotiations. Other countries have been extended the opportunity to request relief if they can provide alternative remedy for national defense concerns.

Follow Michelle Moons on Twitter @MichelleDiana 

Thanks to racism, we can’t have nice things. Or in this case, safe things. Following the Florida school shooting conservatives (sane people) have suggested arming and training teachers as a commonsense way of keeping students safe. The Florida State Legislature just passed a law allowing for this, but wouldn’t you know it, liberals (insane people) say that arming teachers is racist. Why? Because everything is racist. Duh.

KMIZ reports:

Florida lawmakers celebrated the passage of a school safety bill on Wednesday in response to last month’s shooting in Parkland. But the bill left some with a new concern.

Parents, civil rights groups and some Democratic lawmakers warn that part of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act could have deadly unintended consequences for students of color.

The measure in question establishes a voluntary “guardian” program that allows personnel who meet certain criteria to carry firearms in schools‎.

As you’ve probably guessed, “unintended consequences for students of color” spells racism with a capital “R.”

Democrats in the Republican-controlled House and Senate fought unsuccessfully to remove the controversial provision from the legislation. They argued that minority students — who are often subject to disproportionate levels of punishment compared to their white counterparts and are more likely to be mistaken for perpetrators — could become targets.

Here’s a fun quote from one black mom:

“They’re going to be targeted. It’s going to be target practice,” said mother of three Sulaya Williams.

I’m not sure this woman understands what target practice is, but that’s unimportant now because of this:

“We’ve already been traumatized and looking over our shoulder after everything that happened with Trayvon Martin and what happened in Ferguson and everywhere else and now we’re going to be sitting here wondering are our kids going to be targets while going to school?” Williams continued.

I guess she could teach her children not to assault armed citizens and police officers to avoid getting shot, but that’s probably racist too.

Rep. Tracie Davis, a Democrat who represents part of Duval County in northeastern Florida, said the issue of gun violence “affects our communities in a way that some in this chamber will never understand.”

Rep. Cynthia Stafford, another Miami-area Democrat, called it a “dangerous policy.” She said she heard from parents and students who do not want more guns in schools, “So why are we doing this?” she asked.

Stafford cited the impact of implicit bias — a term that refers to unconscious attitudes that impact our actions and decisions — on people of color as another factor that makes the program dangerous.

“I’m worried a black or brown boy running down the hall like anybody else to get to safety reaches in his pocket to pull out his cell phone could be mistaken for [a] shooter,” said Stafford.

But wait, this racism is so bad it attacks the plan to arm teachers from every angle:

She also expressed concern that a minority school staffer serving as guardian with a gun would be seen not as protector, but as a perpetrator.

The basic gist is that white people shouldn’t have guns because they will use them to kill minorities and minorities can’t have guns because white people will kill them too. Also that guns are so freakin’ evil that if that if white people have them they won’t be able to resist their racist urges to shoot innocent black children.

There is one silver lining in this story: I finally found something that isn’t racist in a world where everything is racist. Apparently keeping schools as “gun-free” zones and mass shooter magnets is not racist. Ensuring that students are not safe from mass slaughter is the one thing that doesn’t qualify as racism.

Follow Brian Anderson on Twitter