Category: Bureaucraps

We are the enemy

The United States of America is more than a little weird.

Our system of government was created with the understanding that governments are a lot like fire. They might be useful, but they must be controlled or else things get bad very quickly.

I’m of the belief that our Founding Fathers would want to know why we haven’t started a new revolution if they saw what our federal government has become. Yet, for the most part, we still have the ability to act in a way that our rulers might not like.

Yet based on a couple of reports, one has to ask for how long?

Let’s start with this report from Politico, where it seems DHS has been running a domestic intelligence-gathering operation for some time.

For years, the Department of Homeland Security has run a virtually unknown program gathering domestic intelligence, one of many revelations in a wide-ranging tranche of internal documents reviewed by POLITICO.

Those documents also reveal that a significant number of employees in DHS’s intelligence office have raised concerns that the work they are doing could be illegal.

Well, that’s an amazing start.

So what were they doing that was so shady? Well…

Under the domestic-intelligence program, officials are allowed to seek interviews with just about anyone in the United States. That includes people held in immigrant detention centers, local jails, and federal prison. DHS’s intelligence professionals have to say they’re conducting intelligence interviews, and they have to tell the people they seek to interview that their participation is voluntary. But the fact that they’re allowed to go directly to incarcerated people — circumventing their lawyers — raises important civil liberties concerns, according to legal experts.

That specific element of the program, which has been in place for years, was paused last year because of internal concerns. DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis, which runs the program, uses it to gather information about threats to the U.S., including transnational drug trafficking and organized crime. But the fact that this low-profile office is collecting intelligence by questioning people in the U.S. is virtually unknown.

The inner workings of the program — called the “Overt Human Intelligence Collection Program” — are described in the large tranche of internal documents POLITICO reviewed from the Office of Intelligence and Analysis. Those documents and additional interviews revealed widespread internal concerns about legally questionable tactics and political pressure. The documents also show that people working there fear punishment if they speak out about mismanagement and abuses.

Basically, the way I see it is that if DHS officials come and say they want to talk, you’re going to talk to them. They can say it’s voluntary, but we’ve been conditioned as a nation to see a refusal to comply as evidence you have something to hide. Many will simply talk in hopes of the whole thing disappearing.

Then we have the fact that you pretty much have to tell them the truth. Lying to a federal agent is illegal.

While you can decline to answer questions, many will feel that might invite further scrutiny.

So anyone who gets a visit feels obligated to answer every question DHS officials want to ask and failure to do so will land them in jail.

All for a domestic intelligence agenda that isn’t really in the purview of the department in question. Not really. After all, they’re an intelligence operation, not a law enforcement one, and much of this should fall on law enforcement.

Sure, if we’re talking about international arms shipments to terrorist groups, that’s one thing. We’re not.

And if that were all, it would be enough.

The problem is, it’s not.

You see, under current law, the FBI needs a warrant to get location data based on your cell phone. This is, of course, to protect your privacy.

If there’s probable cause to suspect you of a crime, or at least probable cause that a crime was committed, that’s one thing. They don’t need it otherwise.

And yet, the got it.

How? They just bought it.

THE UNITED STATES Federal Bureau of Investigation has acknowledged for the first time that it purchased US location data rather than obtaining a warrant. While the practice of buying people’s location data has grown increasingly common since the US Supreme Court reined in the government’s ability to warrantlessly track Americans’ phones nearly five years ago, the FBI had not previously revealed ever making such purchases.

The disclosure came today during a US Senate hearing on global threats attended by five of the nation’s intelligence chiefs. Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, put the question of the bureau’s use of commercial data to its director, Christopher Wray: “Does the FBI purchase US phone-geolocation information?” Wray said his agency was not currently doing so, but he acknowledged that it had in the past. He also limited his response to data companies gathered specifically for advertising purposes.

“To my knowledge, we do not currently purchase commercial database information that includes location data derived from internet advertising,” Wray said. “I understand that we previously—as in the past—purchased some such information for a specific national security pilot project. But that’s not been active for some time.” He added that the bureau now relies on a “court-authorized process” to obtain location data from companies.

Now, I’m not going to get into why this is a problem because I think it’s kind of obvious.

What I do want to get into, though, is why they’re doing all of this.

You see, in theory, these agencies are supposed to keep our nation safe. The problem is that they’ve gone beyond their mandate and are basically treating any and all Americans as potential threats. They’ve tossed the Constitution in the crapper and are doing whatever they want.

Why? Because you and I are the enemy.

The Bill of Rights is meant to protect us from things like this, as are numerous other laws regulating government action. They see us all as threats because we may not bow down and kiss the feet of our betters.

They’re spying on Americans, gathering intelligence on us, as if we’re the problem.

Yet anyone with half a brain can look at the last century or two and see where the real threat comes from.

They don’t need location data for cell phones without probable cause. They don’t need to just randomly ask to speak to people unless part of an investigation. And yet, here we are.

Even this could, in theory, be taken as innocent.

However, we also know that the government has worked to censor us. As Michael Schellenberg put it earlier today before Congress, “U.S. government intelligence and security agencies to wage[d] “information warfare” against the American people.”

We are the enemy, folks.

Keep that in mind.

BLUF
It was a cover-up from the beginning, and the media colluded in it every step of the way. The only question now is what kind of accountability can be applied, and whether we have stopped playing with GOF entirely at this point.

Former CDC director: Gain-of-function research “probably caused the greatest pandemic our world has seen”

No kidding. However, don’t consider Robert Redfield a johnny-come-lately to the lab-leak explanation for COVID-19’s origin. Almost exactly two years ago, just after the former CDC director took his leave of the Biden administration, Redfield stunned CNN host Sanjay Gupta by declaring his conclusion that the pandemic started as a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and resulted from gain-of-function (GOF) research funded in part by the US despite warnings against it.

Two years later, Redfield declared himself even more convinced today of his conclusions. Redfield testified today at a hearing of the House select subcommittee on the pandemic, and he didn’t hold back:

Redfield also argues that GOF created the virus, and the global pandemic, just as scientists warned would happen in 2014:

This brings us back to the reasons why the lab-leak theory got so enthusiastically suppressed by both the government and the media. In 2014, a group of scientists formed the Cambridge Working Group to urge governments to stop funding GOF, as both too dangerous and not valuable enough to pursue. When Francis Collins lifted a moratorium on GOF in December 2017, CWG founder Marc Lipitsch offered a prescient warning about what would happen, as I wrote earlier:

Continue reading “”

Whistleblower: FBI’s D.C. Office Tried To Sic Local Agents On Innocents After Bank Of America Volunteered Gun Records

An FBI whistleblower told congressional investigators that the D.C. field office pushed local offices to open criminal investigations into Americans based solely on financial transactions Bank of America tracked and voluntarily provided to the bureau, according to testimony reviewed by The Federalist.

“Bank of America, with no directive from the FBI, datamined its customer base,” whistleblower and recently retired FBI supervisory intelligence analyst George Hill told investigators for the House Judiciary Committee, according to Hill’s testimony.

Hill had identified himself last month as one of the whistleblowers cooperating with congressional investigators when speaking with Just the News’ John Solomon about the disclosures he made to the House Judiciary Committee during a transcribed deposition. A review of Hill’s testimony confirms the details the military veteran and former longtime FBI and NSA analyst told Solomon. It also reveals more troubling details.

According to the material reviewed, Hill testified that on either Jan. 7 or 8, 2021, Bank of America provided the FBI’s D.C. field office a “huge list” of individuals who used Bank of America credit or debit cards in D.C., or the surrounding Maryland and Virginia areas, on Jan. 5, 6, or 7, 2021. Bank of America then elevated to the top of the list anyone who had ever (through Jan. 6, 2021) used a Bank of America product to purchase a firearm.

There was no geographic or date-range limit to the search for firearm purchases, Hill stressed, meaning the individual would be flagged at the top of the list had he “purchased a shotgun in 1999” in Iowa, and used a Bank of America credit card to check out of a hotel on Jan. 5, 2021, in the Northern Virginia area, following a trip that could be completely unrelated to the Capitol riot on Jan. 6.

The D.C. field office, which oversaw the Jan. 6 investigation, distributed the Bank of America list internally to field offices throughout the country, Hill testified in his deposition. Hill further explained that his supervisor at the Boston field office refused to open an investigation on the individuals flagged on the list because there was “no predication.” “There’s no crime that was committed by using a [Bank of America] product in the District or around the District,” Hill testified, explaining his supervisor’s reasoning for why no “further action” was required.

But the D.C. field office pushed back, according to Hill. The D.C. field office told Boston’s supervisory special agent, or SSA, he needed to open up the cases. When the local office’s SSA refused, the D.C. field office threatened to call the assistant special agent in charge, or ASAC, of the local office, Hill told the congressional committee. The SSA stood firm in his refusal, as did the local ASAC, Hill said, even though the D.C. field office then threatened the ASAC that it would escalate the matter to the office’s special agent in charge, or SAC.

The D.C. field office then pushed the office’s SAC to open investigations into the targeted Americans. But to the SAC’s credit, he refused, Hill noted, saying the Boston SAC countered, “No, we’re not going to open up cases based on credit card or debit card activity that took place.”

While Boston’s FBI office refused to open the requested cases, Hill stressed that “what I don’t know and could not give accurate testimony to,” was whether the D.C. field office “took it upon themselves to open cases.”

Hill’s deposition testimony raises another troubling possibility: that one or more of the other 54 local FBI field offices either complied with the D.C. field office’s initial request to open investigations into innocent Americans, or later capitulated when the D.C. office escalated the request up the chain of command to the ASAC and then the SAC.

The only reason the Boston FBI office did not launch investigations into the Bank of America customers flagged by the D.C. field office is that the Boston office’s leadership stood firm against the pressure. And the only reason we know about the D.C. field office’s attempt to target innocent Americans based on Bank of America’s data mining gun owners who happened to be in the greater D.C. area on Jan. 5, 6, or 7, 2021, is that a whistleblower came forward.

What the FBI’s other 54 field offices did in response to the D.C. field office’s pressure is unknown. According to a person familiar with Hill’s testimony, Hill had no information on that question either. Also unknown is whether any other private businesses mined the financial information of their customers, as Bank of America had, and then handed that private information over to the feds.

Congressional investigations and more whistleblowers will be needed to uncover the extent of the FBI’s political targeting of innocent Americans.

Bank of America did not respond to The Federalist’s request for comment.

Byron York: The Peter (Buttigieg) Principle.

The Peter Principle suggests that Peter Buttigieg, at just 41 years of age, has already risen to his level of incompetence.
It’s fair to say many national Democrats did not expect a rising star to peak so soon, and Buttigieg himself certainly did not.
But moving up has its risks, and unfortunately for himself and for the nation, Buttigieg has found a job he cannot do.

New Bill Seeks Automatic Transfer of NFA Items After 90 Days

Idaho Republican Senator James Risch introduced the ATF Transparency Act on Thursday to combat long delays and mistakes in processing National Firearms Act (NFA) items by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

The bill would take the ATF’s stated goal of 90 days to issue tax stamps and change it to a hard deadline. The ATF recently introduced eForms to help cut down on delays, and for a while, the wait times dropped, but according to the latest data from NFA wait time trackers, like the one provided by Silencer Shop, the average wait time is back to nine months.

The new bill will make the ATF automatically issue the tax stamp after 90 days, regardless if the process is complete.

Proponents of the bill cited the increase in NFA applications expected after the new ATF rule designating most braced pistols as short-barreled rifles (SBRs). Owners of SBRs are required to seek a tax stamp from the ATF. The ATF will issue a tax forbearance on the $200 for the stamp for braced pistols.

Continue reading “”

The ATF’s pistol brace ban

Since the Federal Register published the ATF’s final rule to restrict stabilizing pistol braces on January 31, dozens of states as well as many private organizations have launched legal battles against the ATF, claiming that the new rule is unconstitutional.  Luckily, the recent overturn of the “bump stock ban” sets a strong legal precedent to quickly overturn the new stabilizing brace restriction.

A pistol brace is an accessory that was originally designed to facilitate for disabled veterans the ability to effectively operate a pistol with one hand.  According to the ATF’s final rule, the additional surface area provided by a stabilizing pistol brace now classifies these firearms as a short-barreled rifle (SBR), which requires them to be registered and for new purchases to face a long waiting period and additional tax under the National Firearms Act (NFA).  This arbitrary policy shift infringes upon the rights of law-abiding citizens by reclassifying an accessory that had been previously legal and unrestricted.

With the creation of the new rule, the ATF essentially usurped the power to create a new law that deviates from existing law and precedent.  If left unchecked, this regulation sets a dangerous precedent that could develop into many or all federal agencies ruling through bureaucratic mandates with little regard for the Constitution, congressional authority, and legal due process.

A similar executive ruling — the “bump stock ban” — was overturned in January 2023 by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which concluded that the administrative fiat used by the ATF under the Trump administration circumvented Congress and did not follow the legal procedures to become a law.  The same style of administrative fiat was used to tighten regulations on stabilizing pistol braces.  The overturn of the bump stock ban may open the door for legal precedent to shoot down the new pistol brace rule.
A group of disabled veterans represented by the Wisconsin Institute For Law & Liberty (WILL) filed a lawsuit against the ATF on the grounds that the new rule violates the Second Amendment and the separation of powers, which prohibit agencies from creating laws through bureaucratic fiat in a process lacking congressional authorization and oversight.  The lawsuit also claims that each plaintiff utilizes stabilizing braces as a necessity to exercise his 2nd Amendment rights due to his disability.

The National Rifle Association-Institute for Legislative Action, in conjunction with a coalition of 25 states and many other organizations, launched its lawsuit on February 9, against the Biden Administration’s ATF, arguing that the ATF’s “pistol brace ban” is an egregious overstep of its authority and a gross misuse of executive fiat.  According to the ATF website, the ATF’s role in firearms is to “enforce the federal firearms laws,” but this does not give the agency authority to rewrite them.  This is a clear abuse of power by the ATF.

While these lawsuits are pending, Republicans in Washington are doing everything they can to reverse not only this ruling, but past overreach by the ATF as well.  Senators Marshall (R-Kan.) and Kennedy (R-La.) have formally introduced the “Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today” Act, or SHORT Act for short.  This bill aims to remove some short-barreled rifles, shotguns, and other weapons from the daunting grasp of the NFA.  Notably, this bill would also require the ATF to destroy any records related to registration, transfer, or manufacture of firearms removed from the NFA by the bill.

The SHORT Act adds supplementary pressure to the arguments surrounding the new rule on pistol braces.  For advocates of freedom, the ideal outcome would be the overturn of the pistol brace rule and the SHORT Act becoming law.  This would remove immediate threats to Second Amendment rights, and the destruction of registration records would put many at ease over fear of future confiscation and outlawing of NFA firearms.

The ATF’s pistol brace ban illegally redefined federal firearms law through a usurpation of congressional authority, and subsequently infringes upon the rights of disabled individuals as well as the millions of firearms owners who legally purchased their firearms and pistol brace accessories.  The ban should be immediately overturned.

Remember the affirmative action hire Biden nominated for a judge and she couldn’t answer basic, and I mean basic questions about the Constitution?
Well………………….

Biden’s nominee to lead the FAA can’t answer a SINGLE question from Sen Ted Budd about aviation policy

Joe Biden’s nominee to run the FAA couldn’t answer a single question this morning from Senator Ted Budd on aviation policy.

Budd tweeted: “I asked Biden’s nominee for FAA Administrator 7 basic questions about aviation policy. He went 0 for 7. We can’t have an FAA Administrator who needs on the job training.”

I watched it and I don’t have the expertise to know if these questions were appropriate or not for Mr. Phil Washington. So I called a friend of mine with military experience who would know and he said these are definitely questions Washington should know. He said they are pretty basic.

But what makes this even more embarrassing for Washington is that he’s had 8 months to bone up on aviation policy and he clearly hasn’t.

I looked him up and it turns out Washington is currently the CEO of Denver International Airport, a position he’s held since 2021. After this line of questioning I wonder if the airport board might want to find someone else to be CEO.

Upholding her reputation as the dumbest SCOTUS judge.
That’s why she’s the worst justice. She decides who “should” win, who is most “deserving”, instead of what the law says.

There Is No ‘Expert’ Clause in the U.S. Constitution

CNN’s Joan Biskupic writes up yesterday’s oral arguments from the two student loan cases that are currently before the Supreme Court:

Prelogar’s arguments were bolstered by the three liberals among the nine. Sonia Sotomayor, the senior justice on the left, warned that judges would seize greater power if agency authority to carry out acts of Congress were diminished.

Addressing Nebraska state Solicitor General James Campbell, who argued against the Biden administration, Sotomayor said, “What you’re saying is now we’re going to give judges the right to decide how much aid to give them. Instead of the person with the expertise and the experience, the secretary of education, who’s been dealing with educational issues and the problems surrounding student loans, we’re going to take it upon ourselves, instead of leaving that decision in the hands of the person who has experience with these questions.”

This is a nonsense argument from Sotomayor. First off, the question before the Court is not “how much aid” to give to students. The question before the Court is whether the statute it is examining — the 2003 HEROES Act — confers upon the executive branch the power to do what it’s trying to do. If it does, it does. If it doesn’t, it doesn’t. The amount of aid doesn’t enter into that calculation. Neither does the level of “expertise and experience” exhibited by the incumbent Secretary of Education. That Secretary could have the most sparkling mind in American history, or he could be a total moron, and, in both cases, the issue before the Court would be same: “Does he have the power to do it?” There is no provision within the United States Constitution that accords unlimited power to bureaucrats simply because some people consider them to be well-credentialed.

Continue reading “”

The Attorney General had until the 27th to submit a response. He didn’t. Why? who knows, but that led to the 5th Circuit issuing this mandate for their ruling to take effect.

Fifth Circuit Finalizes Ruling In Favor of Plaintiff in Cargill v. Garland, Legalizes Bump Stocks in Three States

In January the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the ATF’s Trump-mandated bump stock ban was unconstitutional. Today, in a 13-3 ruling, the Court of Appeals finalized its ruling, mandating that the case — Cargill v. Garland — be remanded to the lower court to reverse its decision [that upheld the ban] and enter a judgement in favor of the plaintiff, Michael Cargill.

As the court majority wrote . . .

Many commentators argue that non-mechanical bump stocks contribute to firearm deaths and that the Final Rule is good public policy. We express no opinion on those arguments because it is not our job to determine our nation’s public policy. That solemn responsibility lies with the Congress, and our task is confined to deciding cases and controversies, which requires us to apply the law as Congress has written it.
In defining the term machinegun, Congress referred to the mechanism by which the gun’s trigger causes bullets to be fired. Policy judgments aside, we are bound to apply that mechanical definition. And applying that definition to a semi-automatic rifle equipped with a non-mechanical bump stock, we conclude that such a weapon is not a machinegun for purposes of the Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act.
Chevron deference likely has no role here either because the Government waived it or because it does not apply to the Government’s interpretation of a statute imposing criminal penalties. Finally, even if the statute were ambiguous—which it is not—the rule of lenity would require that we interpret the statute in Cargill’s favor. As Justice Holmes framed it years ago, “it is reasonable that a fair warning should be given to the world in language that the common world will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed.” McBoyle, 283 U.S. at 27. We cannot say that the National Firearms Act and Gun Control Act give that fair warning that possession of a non-mechanical bump stock is a crime.
The Final Rule promulgated by the ATF violates the APA. We therefore REVERSE the judgment of the district court and REMAND with instructions to enter judgment for Cargill.

And with that, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has now legalized bump stocks in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. You can read the ruling here.

Three other circuits have upheld the ATF’s ban. The Fifth Circuit’s order officially creates a Circuit Court split, setting up an almost certain review by the Supreme Court which could go much farther than just bump stocks, possibly limiting the extent to which regulatory agencies and the administrative state are free to “interpret,” alter, and create laws. That, of course, is actually Congress’s job, if you believe what the Constitution says.

Continue reading “”

Pennsylvania Social Workers Must Now Ask if Babies ‘Identify’ as ‘Nonbinary’

A new rule in Pennsylvania means that the state’s social workers are now required to ask whether children, including newborn babies, “identify” as “nonbinary.”

When social workers are assigned to a new case, the new requirement states that they must first establish whether the child or infant “identifies” as male, female, or “nonbinary.”

A government form, that social workers in Pennsylvania are now required to complete, was obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

“The state’s Office of Child Development and Early Learning, which funds health and social programs for young children, requires providers to report demographic information on their cases – including, since 2022, the gender identity of infants,” the outlet reported.

“Data collection forms for the agency now ask for newborns’ ‘gender’ rather than their sex and allow providers to select male, female, or ‘Gender Non-Binary.’”

The forms are used for home-visit programs, including cases that exclusively involve infants.

The Free Beacon noted one social worker explained, “I have to ask clients, ‘Is your 10-day-old male, female, or nonbinary?’”

Responding to the report, the state’s Department of Human Services “downplayed the requirements.”

The department’s spokesperson Ali Fogarty said in an email it’s just a data collation point and there’s no “expectation” that parents be asked the question.

The Free Beacon noted, “The questions, which were updated in August according to the forms, come amid mounting concerns that the rise in childhood gender dysphoria has been driven by social forces – including the push to teach young people about gender identity and the practice of ‘affirming’ children who identify as transgender.

“That practice is ‘not a neutral act,’ a review by England’s National Health Service concluded last year, but an ‘active intervention’ that can lock in trans identity, promoting the distress it’s meant to alleviate.”

Most studies show that most cases of children with gender dysphoria resolve themselves as they grow older if they are left alone.

“These questions plant the seed in parents,” the Pennsylvania social worker told the Free Beacon.

FEMA Reverses Decision, Will Deploy ‘Assistance Teams’ to East Palestine Following Chemical Disaster

One day after the Biden administration rejected Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s request for federal assistance in the aftermath of a derailment of a train hauling toxic chemicals, the governor tweeted late Friday evening that the Feds have reversed course in their decision and will deploy resources to East Palestine as soon as Saturday.

“Following further discussions with FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] tonight, they will be deploying federal resources to East Palestine,” Gov. DeWine tweeted. 

The governor and FEMA released this joint statement:

“FEMA and the State of Ohio have been in constant contact regarding emergency operations in East Palestine. U.S. EPA and Ohio EPA have been working together since day one. Tomorrow, FEMA will supplement federal efforts by deploying a Senior Response Official along with a Regional Incident Management Assistance Team (IMAT) to support ongoing operations, including incident coordination and ongoing assessments of potential long term recovery needs.”

The U-turn comes as FEMA Ohio told the state government on Thursday that Palestine wasn’t eligible for disaster assistance to help with the clean-up effort in the toxic spill and controlled burn-off that has resulted in an environmental disaster.

Continue reading “”

Two dozen AGs sue Biden’s ATF for taxing, registering pistol braces

(The Center Square) – Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey joined 24 other attorneys general in suing President Biden’s administration for implementing a rule outlawing pistol braces.

The regulation will “result in the destruction or forfeiture of over 750,000 firearms and will cost the private sector somewhere between $2 and $5 billion,” according to the filing.

“As Attorney General, I will defend the Constitution, which includes holding the Biden Administration accountable for blatantly violating the Second Amendment,” Bailey said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. “I have long held that the Constitution was meant to be a floor, not a ceiling, and the Second Amendment is the amendment that makes all of the others possible.”

The complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief was filed in the U.S. District Court in North Dakota. The document includes information from a patent for a “Pistol Stabilizing Brace,” used to secure a pistol to a shooter’s forearm to stabilize firing. “Through this design, braces are orthotic devices that allow users to more safely and accurately fire handguns,” the document states. Braces are often used by older people and those with limited mobility and prevent recoil and help with accuracy.

Continue reading “”

Gun Owners of America Join Forces With Ken Paxton To Sue ATF Over Gun Brace Regulation.

Gun Owners of America and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton join forces to sue the Biden Administration.

More lawsuits are pouring in against the Biden administration’s recent decision to redefine firearms with pistol braces as short-barrelled rifles (SBR) under the National Firearms Act (NFA), with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Gun Owners of America (GOA) filing a joint lawsuit seeking to block the rule.

The lawsuit, State of Texas v. ATF, was filed in the Federal Southern District Court of Texas on Thursday, joining two other lawsuits filed in federal district courts in Texas. Those include a challenge filed by attorneys with the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty in the Northern District, and a challenge filed in the Eastern District by the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF).

GOA called their lawsuit “the most comprehensive” among those filed, writing, “Our complaint makes clear that the agency’s rule violates the Second Amendment ‘text, history and tradition’ standard set forth by the Supreme Court in its recent Bruen case.” GOA also said their case argues the rule violates several other constitutional provisions, including being an “invalid” exercise of taxing authority.

Paxton also released a statement on the lawsuit, saying he is hopeful they prevail in blocking the rule.

“This is yet another attempt by the Biden Administration to create a workaround to the U.S. Constitution and expand gun registration in America,” Paxton said in the release. “There is absolutely no legal basis for ATF’s haphazard decision to try to change the long-standing classification for stabilizing braces, force registration on Americans, and then throw them in jail for ten years if they don’t quickly comply. This rule is dangerous and unconstitutional, and I’m hopeful that this lawsuit will ensure that it is never allowed to take effect.”

Continue reading “”

Stefanik co-sponsors bill to protect Second Amendment rights of veterans

U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik is an original co-sponsor of legislation that supporters say would protect the Second Amendment rights of veterans.

HR 705, which Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill., introduced Feb. 11, would prohibit the Department of Veterans Affairs from sharing information with the Department of Justice criminal background check system.

Under the VA interpretation of current law, if the VA appoints a fiduciary to help a veteran or beneficiary manage benefits, the VA is required to send the name of the veteran to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System, according to a House Veterans Affairs Committee explanation of the legislation.

“As a result, they may be prohibited from legally purchasing or owning a firearm, despite there being no evidence that those who need a fiduciary are more prone to violence than others.”

The text of the legislation was not yet available, as of Tuesday.

The legislation had 55 co-sponsors, all Republicans, as of Tuesday.

“No VA bureaucrat should be able to instantly strip a veteran of their Second Amendment rights simply because they need help managing their benefits,” said Bost, the principle sponsor, in a news release. “This ludicrous policy is stopping veterans from going to VA for the care they need, and it must end now.”

3 Warning Signs The FBI Might Label You A ‘Radical Traditionalist’ Christian

Federal agencies have long targeted social conservatives, so of course Latin Mass Catholics are on their bad-guy list. So are all serious Christians.

Intelligence analysts and the chief counsel for the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Richmond, Virginia field office are concerned “radical-traditionalist Catholics” are a threat to our democracy and could be ripe for recruitment by white supremacists.

Although FBI headquarters has tried to distance itself from the memo, that does not change the fact that multiple staffers, including a senior attorney, signed off on the intelligence bulletin. That bulletin relied on an Atlantic article about rosary prayer beads being a “weapon” and the grifting hate group called the Southern Poverty Law Center. The retraction does not remove the attitude within the Richmond field office that Catholics who like the Latin Mass or hold conservative views are threats.

Given how the U.S. Department of Justice, FBI, and federal government in general have repeatedly targeted conservatives for their speech and beliefs, it might be good to consider some warning signs that possibly landed traditional, faithful Catholics on the radar of law enforcement.

As someone who attends the traditional Latin Mass and knows many traditional Catholics across the country, I think I know several things that prompted the memo.

1. Interest in Homeschooling
A common interest in Latin Mass parishes and among traditional Catholics is homeschooling. This should not be surprising given the degeneracy and filth in U.S. public schools. Of course, another reason is that many Latin Mass Catholics take seriously the biblical directive that parents are the primary educators of their children.

“Parents have the first responsibility for the education of their children. They bear witness to this responsibility first by creating a home where tenderness, forgiveness, respect, fidelity, and disinterested service are the rule,” the Catechism of the Catholic Church states. “The home is well suited for education in the virtues. This requires an apprenticeship in self-denial, sound judgment, and self-mastery—the preconditions of all true freedom.”

It just drips with radicalism. “Forgiveness” and “self-denial” are obvious codewords for white supremacy, I assume the FBI would say.

Given that faithful Christians are concerned about the moral upbringing of their children, it makes sense they would gravitate to flexible educational options that put parents and kids in charge. But we already know that the Department of Justice views parents who want more say in what their kids are taught as similar to domestic terrorists.

That is why U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland ordered federal law enforcement to look for ways to prosecute parents and other citizens who spoke out at public school board meetings against critical race theory, sexualized curricula, and lockdown policies. People who opt out of the government system are usually seen as a threat by those in charge.

So it makes sense the FBI would be concerned about parents who have opted out of the public school program. After all, the federal government has lost control over what those kids learn and can’t make those kids wear masks and accept state-mandated medical treatments.

2. Meeting Every Sunday with Other People Who Want Good Lives
The FBI, U.S. Department of Defense, and other national security entities have gone woke and embraced critical race theory and LGBT sexual ideology, so it’s no wonder institutions that have held fast to traditional principles would be their target.

It also makes sense, then, that faithful Catholics who spend their Sundays not on drag shows but at church would threaten such a regime. Also, in contrast to the many churches that are dying out, the Latin Mass remains popular, and many churches that celebrate it are bursting at the seams. It is not that people who attend the Latin Mass are somehow inherently more virtuous, but most at least want to embrace virtue and try to grow closer to God.

The message of traditional priests goes against the libertine attitude of LGBT activists who have greatly influenced our federal government. Also, the Christian idea that individuals are responsible for their actions and people should be judged as individuals, not as a collective group responsible for past wrongs, is a threat to critical race theory.

After all, CRT supporters do not want Catholics going to the sacrament of Confession to share how they have failed to live virtuously. Instead, they should pay hundreds of dollars to go to a white privilege talk.

3. Valuing Life, Organic Marriage, and the Sexes
It is well established that federal government entities have it out for pro-life, biblical marriage, anti-gender ideology individuals and groups. After all, the DOJ just lost a case against Mark Houck, a Catholic pro-life dad who stopped an aggressive abortion escort from harassing his 12-year-old son. Couple that with the IRS targeting of Tea Party and conservative Christian groups, and it only follows that churches that hold similar views are on the radar.

According to one popular survey, Catholics who attend the Latin Mass almost exclusively reject abortion and same-sex “marriage.” Even worse for the leftists in the FBI, these Catholics tend to have more kids, given their openness to life. That means even more traditional Catholics are born each day, amplifying the threat. These Christians raise their kids to stay true to the faith, support biblical marriage, and turn to God and their faith, not government and political ideology, in times of trouble.

Even to those who are not Catholic but believe in the sanctity of life or homeschool their kids, the FBI memo should be concerning. An already politicized and weaponized Department of Justice was caught once again targeting innocent Americans for their beliefs.

NPR talks about “major takeaways” from ATF report

The ATF has always at least felt politicized to gun owners. After all, it’s a federal agency that perpetually seems dedicated to restricting our rights. At no point is there any illustration that the agency actually wants to help gun owners or benefit them in any way.

Lately, though, things were turned up to 11.

But data is, at least in theory, just data. While it can be manipulated in various ways, there’s often some degree of usefulness to it.

Leave it to NPR to not just look at it, but try to present it in the most heavily biased way possible.

Stolen guns, untraceable weapons and other deadly devices are becoming more prevalent in U.S. gun crimes, new federal data shows.

Last week, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives released an expansive federal report on guns used in crimes in two decades, providing the public with more detail about stolen firearms and gun trafficking.

The data stretches from 2017 and 2021. During that period, local police reported a shrinking turnaround time for a legally purchased gun to be used in a crime. It also provides insight into the spike in ghost guns and conversion devices.

ATF Director Steven M. Dettelbach wrote that the findings offer “strategic intelligence” for policy makers, law enforcement and researchers to reduce gun violence.

Gun policy experts have said that the release of this data is a big step in better understanding gun crime in the U.S., and can better educate policymakers on the need to regulate several areas of the gun industry.

Because it’s always about regulation, isn’t it.

It should be noted that while this is posted on NPR’s website there’s no actual link to the ATF’s report. Nor does there appear to be a press release on the ATF’s website.

Interesting.

So what about these takeaways in question? Well, it’s interesting in how little framing we’ve got.

Legally purchased firearms are being used in crimes sooner than ever

The ATF found that 54% of traced crime guns were recovered by law enforcement more than three years after their purchase. Those guns were legally purchased, but were later used in crimes, the report indicated.

“Crime guns may change hands a number of times after that first retail sale, and some of those transactions may be a theft or violate one or more regulations on firearm commerce,” the ATF’s report reflected.

“We’ve had record gun sales in the United States, particularly in and around the pandemic, in 2020 and 2021. And the vast majority of those guns are, of course, purchased by law abiding citizens and with no intent to commit crime,” James Densley, a sociologist with the Violence Project, said. In addition to tracking mass shootings with the Violence Project, Densley also studies everyday gun violence and homicide.

“But what we know is from the large numbers of gun sales, there are lots of ways that legal guns end up in the hands of prohibited persons.”

OK, but what’s not mentioned is how much the time has reduced. Are we talking years earlier or mere days? That’s some important information. After all, if the time dropped from 20 years to three, then something sure does seem wonky. If it goes from 3.2 years to 3.1 years, not so much.

That’s far from the only takeaway, though. For example, they note more than a million guns are stolen, which is unfortunate to say the least. Stolen guns are a huge problem and something lawful gun owners want to help mitigate as best they can.

After all, if my guns get stolen, not only am I deprived of my property but someone else might be hurt with one.

NPR also brings up the ATF’s great boogieman, “ghost guns.”

Privately made firearms, also called “ghost guns,” and their involvement in crime “is an emerging issue,” the ATF said in its analysis. Still, law enforcement agencies are just beginning to establish uniform training on how to recognize, identify, and report ghost guns.

The number of suspected ghost guns recovered by law enforcement agencies and sent to the ATF for tracing and tracking “increased by 1,083% from 2017 (1,629) to 2021 (19,273).” This indicates, for one thing, that these ghost guns are increasingly being used to commit crimes, the ATF concludes.

Now, let’s be clear, that is a significant increase over such a short stretch of time.

However, the better question is what percentage of total guns sent for tracing did unserialized firearms account for from year to year.

Let’s remember that 2020 and 2021 were particularly violent years. It’s entirely likely that at least some of that increase was really just because of the increase in violent crime as a whole.

I suspect that if we looked at those numbers, the difference wouldn’t seem so stark.

Yet despite that, it does look like a lot more so-called ghost guns are being sent to the ATF for tracing. I can’t help but note, however, that until the media started freaking out over homemade firearms, remarkably few people were using them for criminal activity.

That didn’t make it in this report, I’m sure.

Look, I could go through the whole thing, but all we have is biased reporting of what the ATF’s report said and we know how that goes. Absolutely none of it changes the fact that our rights are what they are and that gun control laws uniformly fail to prevent criminals from arming themselves.

As such, the report was mostly a waste of taxpayer dollars.

In that way, it’s much like the ATF itself.

A really deep dive into the subject

Adversary Drones Are Spying On The U.S. And The Pentagon Acts Like They’re UFOs.

We may not know the identities of all the mysterious craft that American military personnel and others have been seeing in the skies as of late, but I have seen more than enough to tell you that it is clear that a very terrestrial adversary is toying with us in our own backyard using relatively simple technologies—drones and balloons—and making off with what could be the biggest intelligence haul of a generation. While that may disappoint some who hope the origins of all these events are far more exotic in nature, the strategic implications of these bold operations, which have been happening for years, undeterred, are absolutely massive.

Our team here at The War Zone has spent the last two years indirectly laying out a case for the hypothesis that many of the events involving supposed UFOs, or unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), as they are now often called, over the last decade are actually the manifestation of foreign adversaries harnessing advances in lower-end unmanned aerial vehicle technology, and even simpler platforms, to gather intelligence of extreme fidelity on some of America’s most sensitive warfighting capabilities. Now, considering all the news on this topic in recent weeks, including our own major story on a series of bizarre incidents involving U.S. Navy destroyers and ‘UAP’ off the Southern California coast in 2019, it’s time to not only sum up our case, but to discuss the broader implications of these revelations, what needs to be done about them, and the Pentagon’s fledgling ‘UAP Task Force’ as a whole.

Continue reading “”