A New York Democrat is under fire after she tweeted that the National Rifle Association should be considered as a threat to domestic security after President Trump was elected.

Kathleen Rice took to Twitter to make her audacious claim against the NRA which serves as a powerful lobby against those yappy liberals whose wet dream would be confiscating the guns of all law-abiding citizens, leaving them at the mercy of the criminals who would refuse to surrender their firearms.

Congresswoman Rice tweeted:

I’m just going to say it. #NRA & @DLoesch are quickly becoming domestic security threats under President Trump. We can’t ignore that.

— Kathleen Rice (@RepKathleenRice) August 11, 2017

The woman’s Twitter timeline is typical for a Democrat and chock full of Russian conspiracy theories, race-baiting and criticism of Trump.

Her office then doubled-down by issuing a press release:

2. Statement from @RepKathleenRice‘s spokesman on her now controversial tweet about @Dloesch and the @NRA http://pic.twitter.com/liyDUkLwEM

— Yashar Ali (@yashar) August 11, 2017

She also attacked the NRA’s spokeswoman Dana Loesch.

Lawmaker: NRA and its chief spokeswomen are a ‘domestic security threat’https://t.co/8yBwEB1Tpg http://pic.twitter.com/rkX39vQsA7

— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) August 11, 2017

Via the Washington Times” Rep. Kathleen Rice: NRA and its chief spokeswomen are a ‘domestic security threat’”:

A U.S. House member called the National Rifle Association and one of its chief spokeswomen a threat to national security.

Rep. Kathleen Rice, New York Democrat, appeared to be responding to NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch noting that Philando Castile was in possession of marijuana when police shot the motorist dead. According to her next tweet five minutes later, that makes the NRA a “domestic security threat.”

“I’m just going to say it. #NRA & @DLoesch are quickly becoming domestic security threats under President Trump. We can’t ignore that,” Ms. Rice said.

At the time of the tweet Ms. Loesch was appearing on Fox News Channel, and when host Mark Steyn told her of Ms. Rice accusation, a surprised Ms. Loesch called it disappointing that a House member would call defense of the Second Amendment a threat.

She later took to Twitter and posted: “Rephrase: An elected gov’t official just labeled me and millions of others ‘domestic security threats.’ Wow.”

Noting that Ms. Rice’s language mirrors justifications of police-state persecutions, Ms. Loesch asked the congresswoman’s Twitter feed directly “will ur secret police wear a certain uniform? I want to know who we should look for when we are all taken into custody.”

When can I expect to be arrested, @RepKathleenRice ? Do you have enough secret security to take millions of members into custody. Honest Q.

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) August 11, 2017

.@DLoesch to @RepKathleenRice: “If you find me that threatening, Congresswoman, come and arrest me.” #Tucker http://pic.twitter.com/azGgwQnLUX

— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 12, 2017

.@DLoesch calls on @RepKathleenRice to resign. https://t.co/mtWxDnU1eR http://pic.twitter.com/AFUNXwqMDG

— Fox News (@FoxNews) August 12, 2017

Loesch has since called for Congresswoman Rice to resign given her unconscionable accusation that millions of American gun owners are akin to domestic terrorists.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, inside every Democrat is a totalitarian screaming to get out but it’s no longer easily concealed as party leaders have taken to calling for open rebellion, sanctioning violence through their silence and calling for the state to silence their political adversaries even if it means throwing them all into a gulag system like Stalin did to his enemies.

Chances are that if the historically infamous Soviet dictator was alive today, he would marvel at the fertile recruiting ground that is the Democratic Party.

On Friday’s broadcast of HBO’s “Real Time,” author Richard Dawkins argued that Muslims aren’t being oppressed by critics of Islam like himself, but that they are oppressed by Islam.

Host Bill Maher and Dawkins talked about their mutual dis-invitation from speeches at UC-Berkeley and a radio station canceling an interview with Dawkins.

Dawkins said that there is “an epidemic that’s going on of people running scared from open speech,” and terrified of things that might be offensive.

He added, “I think that this radio station and these universities, they are on our side. We’re on their side. Now, I was de-platformed specifically because of what I was alleged to have said about Islam. I think that the reason they did it was probably a laudable motive, they are on the side of oppressed minorities. They think that Muslims are an oppressed minority, oppressed by people like us. Actually, of course, Muslims are oppressed by Islam.” He later argued that Muslims who don’t oppress women or gay people are being persecuted by those who do and “That’s where the persecution comes from.”

Maher added that “criticism of a religion is not the same thing as bigotry.”

Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett

YouTube allegedly demonetized the vast majority of videos posted on “The Viewer’s View” channel, hosted by Diamond and Silk. The duo believes this was due to their vocal support of President Trump.

Tune in to The Viewer’s View, and you will find a collection of video blog posts with a loudly outspoken conservative-oriented theme that play like especially emphatic clips from the ABC show upon which they are riffing. Everyone from Kathy Griffin to CNN is fair game for the boisterous online duet of Diamond and Silk.

On August 10, Diamond and Silk took to Twitter to question the sudden demonetization of their video series, and they are pretty certain they know the reasoning behind the decision:

.@YouTube @TeamYouTube stopped over 95% percent of our videos from being monetized, stating: “It’s Not Suitable For All Advertisers”…….. http://pic.twitter.com/qDpaL8A4ec

— Diamond and Silk® (@DiamondandSilk) August 10, 2017

Wonder if @YouTube @TeamYouTube stopped the monetization of our videos because we are loyal supporters of the @POTUS ….Hummmm……….. http://pic.twitter.com/QNgy0384hQ

— Diamond and Silk® (@DiamondandSilk) August 10, 2017

Diamond and Silk believe the demonetization smacks of “censorship,” and is “a Bias Method used to Silence our Conservative Voices.” They have also questioned, “how was it ok to monetize our videos for the past two years and now those same videos are no longer eligible for monetization?” According to their own observation, it “appears that @YouTube is trying to determine what people can & cannot see & hear by removing debate, diversity & a difference of opinion.”

Their criticism continued with the threat of legal action…

We Smell A Class Action Lawsuit.
This…. S.ugar H.oney I.ce T.ea have got to stop.
YouTube……Google, this does not look good! http://pic.twitter.com/0GTE0wb6c3

— Diamond and Silk® (@DiamondandSilk) August 10, 2017

…And was followed by retweets of apparent support from both Sarah Palin and Sean Hannity:

They are messing with the wrong ladies. We’ve got your back Diamond And Silk. https://t.co/UZTJDCGzQ0

— Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) August 10, 2017

How sad in America that only conservatives get investigated, fired, boycotted and attacked. Double standard, & liberal silence is repulsive!

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) August 10, 2017

YouTube has yet to comment on whether the accusations are true, or if it is another symptom of advertisers who do not want to be associated with political controversy. Should they officially comment on the matter, we will update the story as appropriate.

Follow Nate Church @Get2Church on Twitter for the latest news in gaming and technology, and snarky opinions on both.

Guam is suddenly the focus of intense media attention after North Korea ostentatiously threatened to attack it with missiles. The governor of Guam, Eddie Calvo, backed President Donald Trump’s warning to rain “fire and fury” on North Korea in a Fox News interview on Wednesday night.

“As far as I’m concerned, as an American citizen, I want a president that says that if any nation such as North Korea attacks Guam, attacks Honolulu, attacks the West Coast, that they will be met with hell and fury,” Calvo told host Brian Kilmeade on Tucker Carlson Tonight.

Calvo said there was “concern and worry” among the people of Guam but “no panic.”

“If you can recall, just going back to 2013, this is about the third, fourth threat made by North Korea specifically to Guam, as well as other facilities or bases in Asia as well as the States – Hawaii and the West Coast,” he pointed out.

“We’ve got right now 160,000 American citizens on this island, 50,000 American citizens in the Northern Marianas. On any given day, we’ve got ten to fifteen thousand tourists enjoying our shores,” the governor said. “We encourage everyone to go through their lives and live them like you would any other day. At the same time, we have both our civil government work in collaboration with the military regional command here that is prepared for any type of contingency.”

Calvo was critical of Senator Lindsey Graham, whom he accused of “encouraging the administration to go to war because they’d rather have it over there than in the homeland.” That is not quite how Graham put it; he said the prospect of war was “terrible” and “horrific” but added that, “if there was going to be a war, it would be in the region, not in America.”

Calvo was, however, supportive of President Trump’s tough talk to Pyongyang. He then reiterated his criticism of Graham, and his plea for policymakers to remember the vulnerability of Guam and the Marianas when making their plans.

“I think it’s important to be very strong. At the same time, be calm,” he counseled.

“I’ve had enough briefings with the military that there is a multi-layered defense, starting from Korea and Japan, as well as in the Western Pacific, as well as our terrestrial assets here in Guam with the THAAD missile defense system, that American communities such as Guam, as well as other American communities, will be protected,” said Calvo.

“Tell Tucker to come to vacation on Guam! Everything’s okay here!” he concluded cheerfully, giving Kilmeade a message to pass along to regular host Tucker Carlson.

Calvo’s history of North Korean bellicosity is correct. Guam residents found themselves practicing air-raid drills in early 2013 after a previous round of threats, in which North Korea specifically named Andersen Air Force Base as a target. Pyongyang issued three distinct threats to attack Guam in the span of about two months.

The United States moved a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) unit to Andersen in response and conducted show-of-force B-52 bomber flights.

In the summer of 2016, North Korea produced a propaganda video that showed Guam targeted with its new Musudan-2 missiles, which have even greater range than the Taepodong-2 missiles that could already strike the island. The current threat involves the new Hwasong-12 missile introduced this year, which is the first North Korean missile that actually has better-than-average odds of hitting Guam. Pyongyang said in 2016 that it might blow up Guam in response to a U.S. anti-missile drill with Japan and South Korea it found provocative.

A few months later, North Korea explicitly threatened a nuclear strike on Guam because it said the United States and South Korea were cooperating too closely on “provocations” such as installing a THAAD system near Seoul. After shrieking that U.S. bomber flights to South Korea were also unacceptable provocations, the North Korean military threatened to use its “treasured nuclear sword” to “reduce to ashes Seoul” and “sweep Guam, the base of provocations, from the surface of the earth.”

On Thursday, Japan stated it also stands ready to protect Guam in the event of a North Korean attack.

Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera told the Japanese parliament that its American-designed Aegis destroyers are capable of shooting down North Korean missiles and that any attack on Guam would be considered an “existential threat to Japan” under defense treaties with the United States. This is a significant change from previous Japanese defense policies, which until last year called for shooting down North Korean missiles only if they were aimed at Japan.

Although almost every major American news organization has misrepresented North Korea’s missile threat as a direct response to Trump’s “fire and fury” comment, the threat was actually issued in response to the U.S. Air Force moving B1-B Lancer supersonic bombers to Guam and test-firing a Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. Both of these factors were specifically cited by the North Korean military spokesman who delivered the missile threat to Guam.

“The Strategic Force of the KPA has taken special note of such maneuvers,” the statement from the North Korean People’s Army said, referring to the bomber deployment and missile launch. “The KPA Strategic Force is now carefully examining the operational plan for making an enveloping fire at the areas around Guam with medium-to-long-range strategic ballistic rocket Hwasong-12 in order to contain the U.S. major military bases on Guam.”

After complaining about “frequent visits to the sky above South Korea” by U.S. strategic bombers, the KPA statement warned, “The U.S. should clearly face up to the fact that the ballistic rockets of the Strategic Force of the KPA are now on constant standby, facing the Pacific Ocean and pay deep attention to their azimuth angle for launch.”

A separate statement from the North Korean General Staff released on the same day mentioned comments by Senator Lindsey Graham and Joint Chiefs Chairman James Dunford and threatened to “turn the U.S. mainland into the theater of a nuclear war” with a “pre-emptive retaliatory operation of justice” but did not refer to President Trump’s comments.

This is not to say that North Korea will not respond to President Trump’s remarks with plenty of blood-curdling threats, but it is important to note that the threat universally cited by the mainstream media as Kim Jong-un’s terrifying push back against Trump’s bluster was, in fact, a threat issued for entirely different reasons – both of them involving American military forces located on U.S. soil.