Category: Bureaucraps

Bombshell Report Exposes Biden’s Massive Chinese Spy Cover-Up

The Biden administration has been caught red-handed prioritizing Beijing’s feelings over American national security. In a shocking revelation, we now know that Biden officials engaged in secret discussions with Chinese counterparts about their spy balloon before bothering to inform the American public that our sovereignty had been violated.

According to a report from Fox News Digital, Internal State Department documents reveal that on Feb. 1, 2023, while a Chinese surveillance balloon was floating across our nation collecting intelligence, Biden officials were more concerned about how exposing this breach would affect our “relationship” with China. Seriously?

That’s right — instead of immediately shooting down this obvious threat to national security, then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken and his team were busy playing diplomatic footsie with Beijing. According to Trump administration officials familiar with the documents, Blinken fretted that public disclosure would have “profound implications for our relationship” with China.

Think about this. The Biden administration knew about this threat on Jan. 28 yet waited until Feb. 2 to inform the American people. That’s five days of silence while a hostile foreign power’s surveillance equipment drifted across our country — a threat we wouldn’t have known about had it not been for civilians who discovered it. It was only afterward that the Biden Pentagon issued its statement. It likely wouldn’t have said anything at all if it could have gotten away with it.

Continue reading “”

So what do we know about U.S. Army Secretary Daniel Driscol regarding the 2nd Amendment?

FBI Director Kash Patel replaced as acting ATF boss, Army Secretary steps in
Patel was replaced at ATF by Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, seven people familiar with the matter told Reuters.

WASHINGTON − FBI Director Kash Patel was removed as the Acting Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and replaced by U.S. Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, seven people familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.

Driscoll will continue to serve as Army Secretary while he also oversees the ATF, an arm of the U.S. Justice Department, said three of the sources, who were granted anonymity to discuss personnel matters that were not yet public.

Patel was sworn in as ATF’s acting director in late February, just a few days after he was also sworn in as FBI Director.

A Justice Department official confirmed the change.

It was not immediately clear when Patel was removed from the role. As of Wednesday afternoon, Patel’s photo and title of acting director was still listed on the ATF’s website.

The abrupt change in leadership comes at a time when senior Justice Department officials are weighing whether to merge ATF with the Drug Enforcement Administration as part of an effort to cut costs.

Where Is the DOJ’s Second Amendment Report?

On February 7th, President Donald Trump gave Attorney General Pam Bondi 30 days to finalize and submit a policy plan of action for enacting pro-gun reforms. Nearly two months later, the Trump Administration hasn’t released any plan.

“Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General shall examine all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other actions of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights of our citizens, and present a proposed plan of action to the President, through the Domestic Policy Advisor, to protect the Second Amendment rights of all Americans,” the order stated.

The 30-day due date for that report would have been March 9th, but that day came and went without any movement from Bondi or the White House. When this omission got some attention, the Department of Justice (DOJ) told ABC News that the deadline was extended to March 16th. Since then, the department has not provided any additional progress updates and did not respond to a request for comment for this article.

The administration’s apparent slow-walking and opacity surrounding its progress raises questions about how much it plans to follow through with the order’s proposed scope.

Trump promised gun voters swift action in undoing all of President Biden’s gun-control achievements during his “very first week back in office.” But he took three weeks before even broaching the subject, and only ordered a review to eventually consider which, if any, of his predecessor’s policies to reform or reverse.

To date, that has not resulted in the initiation of any new rulemaking to repeal any Biden-era regulations.

The few concrete indications of DOJ compliance with the order have mostly taken the form of requests for pauses in various ongoing gun cases to allow it to consider what position it wants to take. The department also began to push for a new framework for restoring the gun rights of former convicts.  The New York Times has reported that move could benefit actor Mel Gibson and at least nine other as-yet-undisclosed individuals, though they haven’t announced any action yet.

While each of those fronts may eventually play out in gun-rights advocates’ favor, the administration’s restrained approach, especially in contrast to actions it has taken elsewhere, has already resulted in one significant loss for gun-rights groups. Though it could have immediately started rolling back Biden’s gun rules without Bondi’s review as an intermediate step, the Trump Administration’s decision to wait left the “ghost gun” kit ban case uninterrupted. That culminated in the Supreme Court issuing a 7-2 ruling upholding that ban at the end of last month, which could make undoing the ban down the line harder.

Delaying legal challenges while the department decides what position to take also risks drawing out the gun-rights movement’s longer-term project of stacking up court decisions permanently invalidating federal gun laws. Even if the DOJ decides not to defend a given gun law or de-prioritize enforcement, subsequent administrations can simply reverse that discretion. The same holds true for the new gun-rights restoration process, which risks undermining gun-rights advocates’ legal challenges to the federal ban on non-violent felons possessing firearms.

To be sure, the administration has also offered gun voters policy changes with more straightforward upsides. It unceremoniously dispensed with the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, for example, which was set up by former President Biden to promote gun-control policies. Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services also scrapped a 2024 surgeon general advisory calling for an “assault weapon” ban, among other new gun restrictions.

It has also, at times, broadened its view beyond the federally-focused executive order. For instance, the DOJ last month announced a civil rights investigation into Los Angeles County over its practice of subjecting concealed carry permit applicants to lengthy wait times and high application fees, and it suggested that additional investigations could soon follow. Shortly thereafter, Trump also issued a separate executive order establishing a new federal task force charged with, among other things, “increas[ing] the speed and lower[ing] the cost of processing concealed carry license requests in the District of Columbia.”

Those moves have no doubt been welcome developments for Second Amendment advocates. Still, they are less potentially impactful than the areas Trump ordered the DOJ to review, and those have seen little to no movement.

Well, how about you just get rid of the who NFA scheme anyway, since the FOPA ’86 banned federal gun registries (except for guns regulated by the NFA)?

Rep. Hinson & Sen. Cotton Reintroduce Bill to Repeal Firearm Transfer Tax

On April 1, 2025, Representative Ashley Hinson (R-IA-02) and Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) reintroduced the Repealing Illegal Freedom and Liberty Excises Act, or the RIFLE Act. These bills (H.R. 2552 and S.1224 respectively) would remove a $200 excise tax that is imposed on law-abiding gun owners when they purchase certain firearms and accessories that are governed by the National Firearms Act.

Repealing Illegal Freedom and Liberty Excises Act, or the RIFLE Act

Since 1934, gun owners wishing to purchase items such as suppressors and short-barreled rifles have been forced to pay a $200 “sin tax” to the federal government.

This tax is, according to the ATF, intended to “curtail, if not prohibit, transactions” of these lawful items. But this legislation would remove that imposing financial barrier.

Speaking on this important legislation, Representative Ashley Hinson said, “The Second Amendment is a Constitutional right that is not to be infringed. Law-abiding gun owners should not be forced to pay an unconstitutional firearm tax. This bill will remove unnecessary financial barriers on lawful gun owners from the antiquated 1934 National Firearms Act and protect the Second Amendment rights of Iowans and Americans.”

“Law-abiding Americans who exercise their Second Amendment rights should not be subject to unnecessary taxes and restrictions preventing them from doing so. Passed into law in 1934, the National Firearms Act needs to be amended. Our legislation will remove the red tape that places an undue financial burden on would-be gun owners,” said Senator Cotton.

“The National Rifle Association applauds Representative Hinson and Senator Cotton on their leadership on the Second Amendment and their reintroduction of the RIFLE Act,” said John Commerford, Executive Director of NRA-ILA. “This $200 punitive tax has only ever served as a financial barrier for law-abiding Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

Representative Hinson has been joined by 28 of her colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives, and Senator Cotton has been joined by 12 of his colleagues in the U.S. Senate. NRA-ILA will continue to update you as this important legislation makes its way through the legislative process.

ATF facial recognition: Chairman Andy Biggs seeks records as gun owners sound alarm

Gun owners across America have every reason to be outraged. According to a March 27, 2025, letter from Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has been secretly using facial recognition technology to track and identify gun owners—all without sufficient oversight, transparency, or even basic training for agents.

Biggs, who chairs the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance, is now demanding that Acting ATF Director Kash Patel hand over all documents relating to the agency’s use of facial recognition software. The call for answers follows multiple bombshell Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports and revelations that the ATF conducted at least 549 facial recognition searches between 2019 and 2022, often on law-abiding Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights.

“The Subcommittee has concerns about ATF’s use of facial recognition and AI programs and the effects that its use has upon American citizens’ Second Amendment rights and rights to privacy,” Biggs wrote.

A Pattern of Overreach

This latest scandal adds to a growing list of examples proving that the federal government simply cannot be trusted with gun owner data. As AmmoLand News previously reported, the ATF has flirted with or outright pursued unconstitutional surveillance for years—compiling digitized firearm transaction records and maintaining nearly 1 billion records at its National Tracing Center.

Continue reading “”

We got rid of this here in Missouri 18 years ago, and the Sheriffs who administered it were thankful they didn’t have to deal with the annoyance of it anymore and it wasn’t anywhere near as restrictive as what this proposed legislation is. This is nothing more than goobermint harassment.

Permit-to-Purchase Measure Advancing in Washington

Washington State already has a “universal” background check law that requires everyone who purchases a firearm to go through a background check, but now Democrats in Olympia want to add a second check, along with training mandates, for every would-be gun owner in the state.

E2SHB 1163 has already passed out of the House of Representatives, and last Thursday cleared the Senate Law and Justice Committee on its way to the Senate floor.

Republicans, according to The Center Square, argue the bill violates gun rights protected by the Constitution. Critics also believe the bill will cost hundreds of dollars and take weeks before someone can buy a gun.

“To be rather blunt about this, I think this is another imprudent piece of legislation that probably will pass out of committee today, but I want to be real clear about it — I don’t think this will survive the brewing historical analog test,” Senator Jeff Holy, R-Cheney, said during Thursday’s Senate Law and Justice Committee meeting. “I could pretty much guarantee litigation is going to immediately come forward once this bill does pass both Chambers.”

Holy, added the media outlet, believes the cost of buying a firearm and taking a safety course is too much of a burden.

“The cost of the permit we’re talking about here is, we’re guessing, maybe $200,” Holy said, as reported by The Center Square. “It’s going to disproportionately impact lower and middle-income people. The last thing we’re going to want to have is people with a need for self-protection to have to go off-market and buy guns from inappropriate sources.”

It’s not only the cost that will send some people to the illicit market. The state currently has a 10-day waiting period on all firearm sales, which is already bad enough. But under the permit-to-purchase scheme making its way through the legislature, the Washington State Patrol would have an additional 30 days to approve or deny a permit application, which can’t be dropped off until after someone has passed the approved firearms safety course. The WSP has already indicated they’d have to hire or more staff or re-allocate existing personnel to process the applications, so you know there’s not going to be a quick turnaround.

What happens when a woman leaves her abusive partner and wants a handgun to protect herself? As things stand, she already has to hope and pray that he doesn’t come after her in the ten days she has to wait between buying a gun and picking it up, even if it only takes a matter of seconds for her background check to come back clean. Under Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1163 she could easily be forced to remain defenseless for over a month, at least if she wants to remain in compliance with the law.

There is simply no way for someone who’s not already a gun owner to be able to take possession of one in a timely manner, even if they have reason to believe that their life is in danger. Washington Attorney General Nick Brown claims this bill will save lives. The truth is that it puts the most vulnerable Washingtonians at risk, either of losing their life or being charged with a crime for daring to exercise their Second Amendment rights without a state-issued permission slip.

Actually I have no problem at all believing this

You Won’t Believe What Insanity HHS Was Funding

Do you want your taxpayer dollars funding studies on preventing pregnancy in “transgender boys” or HIV stigma in Thailand? Fortunately, Trump’s Health and Human Services secretary also considers that a waste, so he’s cutting numerous idiotic woke studies.

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and Trump’s new agency heads have uncovered billions of dollars of egregious fraud and waste, including the previously unknown agency whose employees lived “like kings” and the Social Security funding for 150+ year olds. Now HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is looking to streamline the massive, unwieldy, unconstitutional, and harmful federal healthcare agencies. It’s time to cure the woke mind virus. Read on for mind-blowing craziness.

First reported on Fox News, the woke HHS grants — presumably Biden-era, though there’s been deep government corruption for decades — included one for over $5 million to study “Harnessing the power of text messaging to reduce HIV incidence in adolescent males across the United States.” A Stanford University study, “Sex hormone effects on neurodevelopment: Controlled puberty in transgender adolescents,” received over $3.6 million from HHS.

A whopping 61 grants from HHS subsidiary NIH for California DEI and “gender” studies were also slashed, per Fox. The scale of federal fraud and waste is so vast it is difficult to comprehend. No wonder the Deep State was panicked at the prospect of Donald Trump returning to the White House and at the appointment of Kennedy as HHS secretary.

“#TranscendentHealth – Adapting an LGB+ inclusive teen pregnancy prevention program for transgender boys,” reads another $1,319,024 grant awarded to the Center for Innovative Public Health Research.

The University of California, San Francisco’s $2,554,402 grant for “Structural Racism and Discrimination in Older Men’s Health Inequities” also was canceled, Fox Digital learned, as was a $822,539 grant to UCLA called “Buddhism and HIV Stigma in Thailand: An Intervention Study.”

Meanwhile, Americans are more chronically unhealthy than ever. What a joke the federal bureaucracy is.

Altogether, hundreds of NIH grants on “gender” or DEI topics have already been canceled, including research on “multilevel and multidimensional structural racism” (whatever that means), “gender-affirming hormone therapy in mice”, and “microaggressions.” I think I lost brain cells just reading those inanities, and yet supposedly serious researchers were receiving taxpayer money for this.

Kennedy has already announced a reduction of some 20,000 HHS employees, as multiple of HHS’s subsidiary departments and agencies will be “merging… into a new organization called the Administration for Healthy America or AHA.” Imagine healthcare agencies actually working to make people healthy! Now if only we could have some major accountability for the former HHS leaders who ruined so many lives with their disastrous COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates…

What Happens if DOJ Stops Defending Silencer Regs?

Now that Attorney General Pam Bondi has signaled the Justice Department is re-evaluating its stance that silencers aren’t “firearms” protected by the Second Amendment, what happens if the DOJ reverses course and suddenly declines to defend their inclusion in the National Firearms Act?

We wouldn’t suddenly see suppressors available for sale with a simple NICS check, unfortunately. That would require changing the NFA itself, which in turn would require congressional approval. The House may very well give its approval to the SHUSH Act, but it’s gonna be tough to get 60 senators on board with the change. So what impact would a DOJ reversal have in practical terms?

The NFA has been a flashpoint for advocates, who say that silencers are not frequently used in crime and believe that the silencers and other weapons regulated under the law, including machine guns and short-barreled rifles and shotguns, are protected by the Second Amendment. A decision by the Justice Department not to defend the law may, however, make it harder for gun rights groups to challenge the law at the Supreme Court.

“If Trump administration decides not to prosecute people under for illegal silencer possession while in office, that’s a good short-term win, that’s what a lot of gun rights activists will want,” said Stephen Gutowski, a gun safety instructor and founder of The Reload.

However, Gutowski added that if Democrats regain the White House in four years, “They can just reverse the policies and go back and start prosecuting people again, because the law was never found unconstitutional or invalid.”

If the Trump administration just decides not to enforce the NFA regulations surrounding suppressors, I don’t think that would actually be much of a win for gun owners, though it might provide some short term benefit for suppressor buyers and the companies that make them. What would stop the next Democratic administration from zealously prosecuting those companies or anyone who purchased/possesses a suppressor not registered or taxed under the NFA?

The best option may be for the Trump administration to decline to defend the current statute and not raising any objections to anti-gun AGs intervening as defendants in ongoing litigation. Then the full weight of the DOJ could be directed to side with the plaintiffs in these lawsuits, while allowing the cases to continue to make their way to SCOTUS.

Gun safety groups, for their part, say that silencers put people at risk by make a mass shooting harder to hear and contend that because silencers reduce the recoil when a gun is fired, it could make it easier for a gunman with a semiautomatic to shoot with fewer interruptions.

“Silencers in the wrong hands create serious public safety risks,” Everytown for Gun Safety writes on their website. “The loud and distinctive noise that a gun makes is one of its most important safety features: when people hear it, they realize they may need to run, hide, or protect others.”

The group also raises concerns that removing silencers from the NFA would allow them to be purchased without a background check.

Frankly, if suppressors aren’t “firearms” as the DOJ (and at least one federal court contends), then they arguably shouldn’t be included in the National Firearms Act as a restricted firearm. And yes, their removal from the NFA could allow their purchase without a background check, but if they’re merely an accessory then so what? What other firearm accessory requires a background check of any kind, much less a detailed check and an extra $200 tax?

Of course, whether there are five justices on the Supreme Court at the moment who are ready to remove suppressors from the NFA is very much an open question, especially after Wednesday’s 7-2 decision upholding the ATF’s rule treating unfinished frames and receivers as completed firearms. The bottom line is even if the Trump administration is on board with the idea, deregulating suppressors is going to be a challenge, whether it’s through the legislative or judicial branches.

The Supreme Court has upheld the ATF’s “frame or receiver” rule.

During the Biden ‘administration’ ATF ruled that “80%” receivers were to be treated and regulated just like they were fully finished guns.

The were sued and it went all the way to SCOTUS.

Justices Alito and Thomas were the only ones to dissent. All the others agreed. Regard the fate of future decisions accordingly.

 

Sam Corcos and the IRS Mess

I’ve been writing about the government’s data processing troubles for quite awhile now, and particularly since DOGE started to find where the bodies — well, I was going to say “bodies were buried” but that’s wrong. The government’s data processing corpses aren’t buried. They’re stinking shambling zombie bodies shuffling through the corridors seeking brains.

Of course, as wild wastes of money are uncovered, everyone and their aforementioned brothers, brothers-in-law, and politically connected people outside government have been screaming, while we regular old taxpayers are saying “God oh God, how did we get in this mess?”

So, Sam Corcos, CEO of Levels, a health startup, and Scott Bessent, secretary of the Treasury, were on Laura Ingraham’s show on March 20, talking about data processing at the IRS in particular.

The IRS has come up before — for example, when Musk and the DOGE boys discovered there were people up to almost 400 years old still active in the Social Security records, which are closely tied to the IRS records ever since the IRS declared that line on the Social Security Card about “not to be used for identification” was no longer operative.

Corcos was brought in to work for the Treasury to look at the IRS modernization program and its operations and maintenance budget. Now, the modernization program is new development — they’re attempting to build a more modern system and infrastructure to handle what the Social Security Administration does, while maintenance and operations is the budget that pays for just keeping the existing system running.

Corcos is running a successful startup — have a look at its website. So he has some expertise in software development. He started looking at the IRS systems.

It was interesting, if by interesting you mean “enraging” and “obscene.” The IRS has had this ongoing modernization program in operation since 1990 — that after a previous modernization program called Tax Systems Modernization (TSM), which started in 1986 and was finally declared a failure in 1997. Then there was the Customer Account Data Engine (CADE), which was launched in 2001 and terminated as a failure in 2009, having delivered about 15 percent of its planned function.

The existing system, as I’ve written about before, is based on IBM mainframes and written in COBOL and Assembler — that is, directly as machine instructions.

The current modernization program, according to Corcos, is currently 30 years behind schedule and $15 billion over budget. It’s been 35 years in development, and is now “five years away” from completion. And has been since 1996.

According to Secretary Bessent, the hangup is “entrenched interests” like consultants and contractors. Eighty percent of the IRS’s $3.5 billion budget goes to outsiders. Bessent says, “That’s not efficiency — that’s a racket.”

Corcos says the top priority is to turn this around. “The IRS spends way more than any private company would on a program like this. We’ve cut about $1.5 billion from the modernization budget. … It’s about asking tough questions and trimming the fat.”

It’s easy to blame the government developers, but Corcos says the developers are excellent — it’s management that’s the issue. “You see contracts — $10 million, $20 million, $50 million — and ask ‘Why are we doing this?’ Everyone shrugs. … You cancel it and nothing breaks. Inertia’s running the show — it just takes someone who cares to start asking questions.”

DOJ Allows Federal Gun Rights Restoration for First Time Since 1992

DOJ Allows Federal Gun Rights Restoration for First Time Since 1992 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

March 19, 2025 

Washington, D.C. – The Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued an Interim Final Rule removing the Attorney General’s delegation of authority to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to process applications for relief from federal firearms disabilities under 18 U.S.C. 925(c). This action follows more than three decades of Congressional funding restrictions that have rendered ATF unable to process individual applications. 

The rule removes outdated regulations and is part of a broader review of firearm-related policies under Executive Order 14206 (Protecting Second Amendment Rights). Upon the interim final rule’s expected publication tomorrow, the DOJ will begin allowing individuals who are not “dangerous to public safety” to use the statute and petition to have their gun rights restored. 

Key Points of the Rule Change: 

  • Since 1992, Congress has prohibited ATF from using funds to process gun rights restoration applications, making the statute obsolete. 
  • ATF will no longer handle individual firearm disability relief applications under 18 U.S.C. 925(c). DOJ will instead carry out the statute and process petitions for gun rights restoration. 
  • The DOJ rule goes into effect immediately upon publication and will simultaneously accept public comments on the rule before issuing a final version. 

Gun Owners of America remains committed to monitoring this process and ensuring that any future policies respect the constitutional rights of all law-abiding citizens. 

Erich Pratt, Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, issued the following statement: 

“For decades, law-abiding Americans who have had their gun rights unfairly restricted have been left in legal limbo—creating an unconstitutional de facto lifetime gun ban. This bureaucratic failure has denied thousands of individuals their lawful opportunity to restore their rights. The DOJ’s decision to finally withdraw ATF’s authority in this matter is an encouraging sign that this administration is serious about protecting the Second Amendment for all Americans.” 

Aidan Johnston, Director of Federal Affairs for Gun Owners of America, issued the following statement: 

“Since its enactment in 1992, Gun Owners of America has fought against the ‘Schumer Amendment’ which defunded the federal gun rights restoration statute. GOA and thousands of would-be gun owners are grateful to President Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi for once again allowing gun owners to petition to have their gun rights restored by the Department of Justice. We hope to see many more infringements repealed as the federal government carries out President Trump’s executive order Protecting Second Amendment Rights.” 

Gun Rights Lawyer Named ATF’s New Chief Legal Counsel

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) unveiled its new Chief Legal Counsel.

Robert Leider will take over duties as the top lawyer of the ATF. The appointment is a sharp change of course from former Chief Counsel Pamela Hicks. Ms. Hicks’s views on guns were in line with groups like Everytown and Brady. Mr. Leider takes a more liberty-based approach to guns. The appointment of Leider to the position saw an outpouring of joy from gun rights activists.

Mr. Leider was an assistant professor at George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School, where he taught a class on the Second Amendment. Before becoming a professor, he worked for powerhouse law firm Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, LLP. He also clerked for Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas. Mr. Leider lists his interests as the right of self-defense and the Second Amendment.

“Underneath this debate over which “arms” the Second Amendment protects is a critical dispute about the contemporary purpose of the Second Amendment,” Leider wrote. “Illinois is essentially arguing that the Second Amendment exclusively protects individual self-defense against crime. The State understands Heller to have divorced entirely the right to keep and bear arms from the Second Amendment.”

Mr. Leider has also argued against the “Gun Free Zone Act.” The “Gun Free Zone Act” would have made any property within 1000 feet of a school a “sensitive area.” He argued that the law would strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights just because they live near a school. He claims such a law would fail a Bruen test and be unconstitutional.

Mr. Leider also has penned articles that advocated the stripping of qualified immunity from those state officers who resist the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling. If qualified immunity was removed from these state officers, it could open people like New York State Governor Kathy Hochul to legal action. States have passed laws inconsistent with Bruen since SCOTUS ruled on the case.

“In former may issue states, gun owners will face substantial legal risks when exercising their rights,” Leider wrote. “But the legal risk may not only be on private citizens.

Despite strengthening qualified immunity in recent years, the Supreme Court has not shielded government agents who willfully seek to violate the Constitution.

New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and California may find that, in bringing down the heavy hand of the State against individuals who exercise their Second Amendment rights, their own police officers will get hit by the blow. “

Mr. Leider also believes bans on the open carrying of firearms violate the Second Amendment. He states that everyone should have the right to open carry. Out of all the changes made to gun control since Trump took office, the appointment of Leider to the Chief Counsel position might be the biggest.

Lawmakers Pushing Commerce Secretary To Dump Biden Admin’s Gun Export Restriction.

A group of 88 members of the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate are pushing to have the Biden Administration rule restricting firearm exports by law-abiding American manufacturers reversed, and they want it done now.

On March 7, the lawmakers, led by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green, R-Tennessee, sent a letter to Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick requesting reversal of the policy, which was part of the Biden Administration’s weaponized attack on gun owners, gun sellers and gun makers.

“As soon as is practically possible, we respectfully request that you rescind the Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security’s (BIS) recent interim final rule (IFR) ‘Revision of Firearms License Requirements,” the letter stated. “This misguided and destructive IFR is costing the American firearms industry nearly $500 million annually while doing nothing to advance U.S. interests or regional stability. Despite numerous attempts to rein in these actions through letters, legislation, hearings, markups and oversight, the Biden BIS ignored Congress and used the IFR to advance the Biden administration’s anti-firearms agenda.”

The letter also referenced President Donald Trump’s recent executive order instructing new Attorney General Pam Bondi to review all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements and other actions of executive departments and agencies that violate the Second Amendment or furthered the Biden administration’s anti-firearms agenda.

“Section (2)(b)(vii) of the executive order specifically requires the review and remediation of any agency action regarding the ‘processing of applications, to make, manufacture, transfer or export firearms.’ Because this IFR stops the commercial export of firearms, ammunition and related components to over 36 countries and severely limits the ability of American businesses to obtain export licenses, we believe this IFR ought to be addressed immediately.”

For his part, Sen. Lee said now is the time to act to get this onerous restriction off the books.

Continue reading “”

Should firearms background check system be abolished?

To some people, firearm background checks are accepted and considered a way to prevent bad guys from getting guns. They’re completely wrong, and here’s why.

The background check system, otherwise known as the “government hijacking of a God-given right and selling it back to you as a government-issued privilege,” is unconstitutional and dangerous to law-abiding citizens.

As we inch our way toward state-to-state reciprocity with constitutional carry in our major cities, we recognize that many states not only require a government-issued permission slip to carry a gun but also make it almost impossible to obtain that permit. Even if you can make it through the rat maze of training, fees, background checks, storage requirements, magazine capacity limitations, and a list of other constitution-violating requirements, most of society is off limits to you and your firearm because many state gun laws have deemed public and even private places, gun free zones.

The idea of undergoing and passing background checks as a prerequisite to exercising the 2nd Amendment should have never been a thought even in the darkest corners of the most communist minds of the most radical left-wing ideologues, not only because it violates the rights of American citizens, but also because it puts undeserving Americans in legal jeopardy and in physical danger.

According to the Government Accountability Office, in 2017, the NICS background check system denied 112,090 people the right to purchase a firearm. Of those 112,090 denials, only 12,710 were investigated. We have to ask ourselves: If over 112,000 people were denied but only 12,710 Investigations took place, wouldn’t that be clear evidence that the system is failing and falsely denying good people their right to keep and bear?

It gets worse. That same year, and from that group of 112,090 denials, there were only 12 prosecutions for the crime of attempting to purchase a firearm. Now the anti-gun crowd says, “See, we stopped 12 mass shootings!” Well, there are problems with that argument.

First of all, do we have no regard for the 112,078 people who were caught up in the poorly run background check system? What happens to those people? Well, the anti-gun crowd couldn’t care less about the people who are falsely denied their 2nd Amendment rights. As well as being falsely labeled a criminal and refused the ability to purchase a gun, good folks who are denied must also jump through hoops, make appeals, and wait.

Then, they have to wait some more because we know how efficient government agencies operate. By some estimates, approximately 80% of the NICS denials are never even appealed, often because the person denied is unable to navigate the appeals process or is unable to afford a lawyer to help them. In the meantime, good people are rendered unarmed and helpless by an unconstitutional process that should never have existed in the first place.

What about the 12 prosecutions in 2017? Were they mass murderers? And if they were, why weren’t they in jail? The background check system is created under the guise of stopping violent criminals from purchasing firearms, but if a person has done something so heinous that they lose their rights, wouldn’t that crime be enough to keep them in jail? And if not, why not? Why are they able to walk among us? It would seem the problem has less to do with guns and more to do with a criminal justice system that works to keep a violent element on our streets. The background check system, however, has been much more effective at preventing law-abiding citizens from possessing firearms than criminals, and we can see that by simply looking at the numbers.

Now, you might remember the anti-gun crowd cheering in the media that the number of firearm purchase denials reached the highest number yet in the year 2021. That year, there were approximately 300,000 background check denials. This was great news to the gun grabbers because all they really care about is disarming their political opposition, but did the percentage of false denials change?

With a huge increase in firearm purchases after the left-wing riots of 2020, the FBI claims that its denial rate is 99.8% accurate. Mysteriously, the Government Accountability Office has still not posted their findings for 2022, but you’re supposed to believe that the FBI went from a .01% success rate to a 99.8% success rate, and you are now safe from false denials. John Lott from the Crime Prevention Research Center has claimed that the exact opposite is true, and approximately 99% of firearm purchase denials are false positives, meaning good people are being denied their rights for no reason.

After watching the NICS system deny thousands of good people over the years, you’re supposed to believe that now, magically, the firearm background check system is functioning as it should. Well, we’re not buying it for a minute. We know the system is falsely denying good people their right to own firearms, and the system needs to be abolished.

Our Founding Fathers didn’t say, “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed… as long as you go through a background check system designed by people who don’t want you to have a gun.”

 

ATF’s own documents show it is corrupt and ripe for replacement
Every Friday the ATF sends out press releases …

Every Friday afternoon the ATF sends out press releases from its 25 Field Divisions—big cities like Los Angeles, Miami, New York and 22 more. Users have to sign up to receive the emails, which usually describe the arrests the ATF claims it made during the week.

By far the vast majority of the actions described in the press releases—the arrests and the investigations—were not the result of any work by the ATF. The arrests were made by local cops who found a stolen gun or noticed that their suspect was a convicted felon and should not have possessed a firearm.

The ATF is usually brought into these investigations only after the arrest, once the real police have lodged their suspect in a county jail.

Still, according to the ATF’s own weekly emails, the agency takes credit for everything the local cops have done—every single lead or arrest—even though their special agents never left the building and never arrested or even met the bad guys.

The following are some of the press releases from 10 of the ATF’s 25 Field Divisions, which were sent around 3 p.m. on Friday, March 7, 2025. Five of the ATF Field Divisions did not send out any press releases.

As you will see, only two involve ATF-led operations.

Continue reading “”

If they’re being told to break recordkeeping laws it’s because the records reveal they broke worse laws.

WHAT? USAID Senior Staffer Instructs Remaining Staff to Convene for an ‘All Day’ Document Destruction

After Secretary of State Marco Rubio took to X on Monday to declare that 83 percent of the USAID programs would be cancelled and contracts rescinded, a curious memo from a USAID senior staffer obtained by POLITICO instructed remaining staffers to convene at the former agency on Tuesday for destruction of “classified safes and personnel documents.”

Rubio said:

After a 6 week review we are officially cancelling 83% of the programs at USAID.

The 5200 contracts that are now cancelled spent tens of billions of dollars in ways that did not serve, (and in some cases even harmed), the core national interests of the United States.

In consultation with Congress, we intend for the remaining 18% of programs we are keeping (approximately 1000) to now be administered more effectively under the State Department.

Thank you to DOGE and our hardworking staff who worked very long hours to achieve this overdue and historic reform.

And now, according to Politico:

A senior official at USAID instructed the agency’s remaining staff to convene at the agency’s now-former headquarters in Washington on Tuesday for an “all day” group effort to destroy documents stored there, many of which contain sensitive information.

The materials earmarked for destruction include contents of the agency’s “classified safes and personnel documents” at the Ronald Reagan Building, said an email sent by USAID’s acting executive director, Erica Carr, and obtained by POLITICO.

“Shred as many documents first, and reserve the burn bags for when the shredder becomes unavailable or needs a break,” the email said. Carr instructed staff to label the burn bags with the words “SECRET” and “USAID/B/IO/” (agency shorthand for “bureau or independent office”) in dark Sharpie.

The email didn’t provide any reason for the document destruction. The building is being emptied out after mass layoffs, which may have disrupted routine document destruction timetables. Customs and Border Protection is planning to move into the USAID facility, having rented 390,000 square feet of office space in the building last month.

ProPublica journalist Brett Murphy also claims to be in receipt of this memo, citing it is from, “the agency’s acting executive secretary.”

Continue reading “”