This Is Why Biden Didn’t Take a Cognitive Test As Part of His Physical

President Joe Biden made a surprise visit to Walter Reed Medical Center Wednesday morning for his annual physical.

“I’m squared away,” Biden said after the appointment and before a meeting with law enforcement at the White House. “They think I look too young.”

During the daily press briefing in the afternoon, Secretary Karine Jean Pierre said Biden didn’t take a cognitive test as part of the physically because he “doesn’t need one.”

She also refused to make Biden’s physician available for questioning, arguing it isn’t “the norm.” Former President Donald Trump’s physician was made available to the press for robust questioning inside the briefing room.

The statements are at odds with a report put out by Special Counsel Robert Hur, which states Biden wasn’t charged for a serious of felonies because of his failing memory and lack of recollection.

“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during out interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” the report states. “Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him — by then a former president well into his eighties — of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

How is American Freedom Too Sensitive for Public Spaces?

If a freedom-loving NRA member from, say, 1994, had been able to look into a crystal ball and see 30 years forward to today, they’d no doubt be pleased and perhaps a bit jealous, but also a little perplexed.

They’d notice the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in D.C. v. Heller (2008), McDonald v. Chicago (2010) and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which together decree that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right. It protects each law-abiding citizen’s right to own and carry firearms for self-defense and for other legal purposes. They’d be pleased to see this.

They’d notice the massive expansion of constitutional carry, the passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005 and the huge growth in gun ownership and of concealed carry in general and, again, they’d be pleased.

They’d see all the new and useful carry options in handguns, holsters and more and would likely be a little jealous.

Indeed, they’d marvel at the renaissance for this freedom.

But they’d also shake their heads and clench their fists at the endless, and often novel, attacks from gun-control proponents on our Second Amendment rights.

And then, finally, they’d have to be perplexed as they wondered what this “sensitive-places” thing is all about.

Continue reading “”

NSSF Wins Preliminary Injunction Against California Law Allowing Frivolous Lawsuits Against Gun Industry

A U.S. District Judge has granted an injunction prohibiting the enforcement of California’s law that exposes firearms manufacturers and retailers to lawsuits in the state for lawful commerce in firearms that takes place entirely outside the state of California when those legally made and sold products are misused by criminals and others.

The ruling by Judge Schopler in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of California enjoined the enforcement of California AB 1594, the so-called “Firearm Industry Responsibility Act.” NSSF sued to challenge the law in June 2023 and moved for an injunction. In granting the injunction, Judge Schopler found the law is likely unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause.

“We are thankful the court enjoined the state from suing members of the firearm industry under this unconstitutional law that attempts to use the real threat of liability on commerce beyond California’s borders and impose its policy choices on its sister states,” stated NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane.

Among other provisions, California AB 1594 bans the manufacture, sale and marketing of firearms the state deems “abnormally dangerous.” It allows civil lawsuits against a firearm industry member to be filed by the Attorney General, any municipality and any person who claims to have suffered harm from the misuse of a legal, lawfully sold firearm by a remote third party. The law unconstitutionally invades the sovereignty of sister states by directly regulating lawful commerce occurring entirely outside the state of California in violation of the Commerce Clause and the United States’ system of federalism. The law also violates the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) enacted by Congress in 2005 to stop just these sorts of frivolous lawsuits against members of the industry.

“We are reviewing the balance of the court’s decision and whether we will file an amended complaint to provide the court more details on how California’s unconstitutional law and its threat of crushing liability is causing real and ongoing harm to members of our industry,” Keane said.

NSSF also claims in its lawsuit that the law also infringes on the Second Amendment and chills First Amendment rights by restricting protected free-speech advertising of Constitutionally-protected products that are lawfully made and sold – even when that advertising takes place outside of California’s borders.

Joe Biden Tries to Give a Massive Gift to Hamas, Israel Tells Him to Pound Sand

When conservatives were telling Democrats to “back the blue,” I’m pretty sure they didn’t mean like this. According to a new report, the Biden administration is demanding that Israel stop targeting the Hamas-controlled police forces in Gaza.

That comes as Israel continues its push into the southern part of the territory where the remnants of Hamas remain. It also comes amidst reports (including video evidence) of these “police forces” shooting civilians to facilitate the stealing of aid for the terrorists holed up there.

The Biden administration asked Israel to stop targeting members of the Hamas-run civilian police force who escort aid trucks in Gaza, warning that a “total breakdown of law and order” is significantly exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in the enclave, three U.S. and Israeli officials told Axios.

Why it matters: U.S. officials say they are increasingly concerned “that Gaza is turning into Mogadishu” as a security vacuum and desperation have opened the door for armed gangs to attack and loot aid trucks, putting even more pressure on the Strip’s already strained humanitarian system.

In late December, a video emerged of a Hamas police officer shooting and killing a young boy for trying to take food from one of the aid trucks. Since then, numerous reports have emerged of civilians being shot while the trucks are escorted through starving crowds. Little if no international condemnation has followed the incidents, and apparently, Joe Biden is just fine with it.

This is akin to the Allied Powers in World War II being commanded to not kill members of the Gestapo to ensure they can “maintain order.” There is no actual “civilian police force” in Gaza. They are all supportive of Hamas. They all commit and/or allow atrocities against innocent people, and they are all facilitating the theft of aid that is only prolonging the war.

So naturally, Biden is all for doing what it takes to knee-cap Israel and help keep that status quo in place. We are talking about the worst foreign policy mind in American political history when considering the breadth of time his penchant for failure has presided over. If there’s a bad decision to be made, Biden is going to be there to make it.

Frankly, I’m a little tired of hearing about the “humanitarian crisis” in Gaza sans any context, as if it gets solved by leaving Hamas in power. This can all end tomorrow if the terrorist government simply agrees to go into exile and lets some kind of coalition demilitarize the territory. That’s the way to help the people in Rafah right now. The way to not help them is to preserve the “police force” that is helping exacerbate their situation.

Smartly, Israel told Biden to pound sand.

But Israel rebuffed the request because one of its goals in the war is to ensure that Hamas no longer runs Gaza, two Israeli officials said.

Israel is also looking to cooperate with those in Gaza who oppose Hamas to facilitate aid instead of relying on the very terrorists they are fighting to deliver it. That would seem like a common sense approach given the entire point of the war is to depose Hamas. Perhaps that’s too complicated for the Biden administration to understand.

Any “solution” to the war in Gaza that doesn’t include the complete removal of Hamas as a governing force is not a solution. It’s simply a massive gift to terrorists who will inevitably strike again, leading to yet another war and yet more death and destruction. The United States, Europe, and the dictators at the UN can either figure that out or get out of the way.

Judge Declares Fargo’s Ban on Home-Based Gun Businesses Goes Too Far

For several years the city of Fargo, North Dakota has prohibited FFL’s from operating out of their homes, but the state legislature took aim at that restriction last year and passed a law that bans localities from establishing zoning ordinances that specifically include firearms and ammunition based businesses.

The city almost immediately filed suit challenging the law, but this week state District Judge Cherie Clark ruled against Fargo; tossing out the city’s lawsuit and rejecting its argument that the zoning preemption law violates the state constitution and the home rule powers granted to local authorities.

“While the Court agrees that (the North Dakota Constitution) intends for ‘maximum local self-government,’ the law is not settled that this language alone provides home rule cities the right to legislate on topics the state legislature has limited,” the judge wrote.

But she also expressed concerns about the Legislature’s actions: “If the legislature continues to pare home rule powers, home rule cities lack the discretion to address important issues impacting their respective and unique communities.”

What, exactly, is so unique about Fargo that federal firearms licensees shouldn’t be allowed to operate a home-based business? The city has never offered a good explanation, instead blithely asserting that it “does not want its residents to utilize their homes in residential areas as gun stores.”

Well, tough. There’s no prohibition in either state or federal law that precludes home-based FFLs, and it doesn’t appear that any other locality in the state has tried to erect any similar barriers, so why should FFLs in Fargo be punished or forced to spend money on a brick-and-mortar location, especially if they’re selling guns on a part-time basis?

This is actually the second law that the state legislature has adopted to deal with Fargo’s restrictions, but the city was successful in defending its ordinance in 2021, which led lawmakers to try again last year.

Bill sponsor and Republican state Rep. Ben Koppelman told a state Senate panel in April that the issue came to greater attention in 2016 when, because of the ordinance, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives refused to renew the federal firearms licenses of Fargo dealers who sold out of their homes.

“What is at issue is whether we want local governments creating gun control or whether we want gun regulations to remain a state-controlled issue,” Koppelman said in April. “Without this bill and in light of the (2021) court opinion, I think local political subdivisions could propose all sorts of local gun control, and based on the anti-gun track record of the City of Fargo Commission, I think we could expect it.”

Both sides in the lawsuit agree that the issue at hand goes beyond the zoning laws in question, and instead touches on the ability of home-rule localities to pass their own laws in any number of areas. But even though the North Dakota Constitution compelled the state legislature to come up with a home-rule statute and lawmakers granted home-rule communities the authority to adopt ordinances, resolutions, and regulations that provide for public health, safety, morals, and welfare, it’s still within the state’s authority to declare certain subjects off-limits to local control.

Three years ago the legislature adopted a preemption law stating:

1. A political subdivision, including home rule cities or counties, may not enact a zoning ordinance or any other ordinance relating to the purchase, sale, ownership, possession,transfer of ownership, registration, or licensure of firearms and ammunition which is more restrictive than state law. All such existing ordinances are void.

A state judge ruled that Fargo’s home-based FFL zoning prohibition could still be enforced because the state had no regulations concerning commercial firearms sales. While most of us would conclude that any zoning ordinance would be more restrictive than a state law that doesn’t exist, District Judge Stephannie Nicole Stiel sided with Fargo’s argument that the ordinance in question wasn’t more restrictive than state law because state statutes were silent on commercial gun sales sales.

That’s not the case these days, thanks to the legislature’s response last year, and Judge Clark made the right call, even though her editorializing on the legislature’s actions was completely unnecessary. Fargo officials could still appeal Clark’s decision, but the odds of success are pretty long, and it would be a waste of time and taxpayer money to try to keep this needless ordinance in place instead of accepting home-based FFLs and the tax revenue they generate.

The Honorable Judge Benitez strikes again.

The state court mistakenly did not regard the pistol or the billy to be the sorts of arms protected by the Second Amendment. Instead, only weapons of war were covered by the Constitution, according to Workman. As to other kinds of arms, Workman incorrectly observed,

in regard to the kind of arms referred to in the [Second] amendment, it must be held to refer to the weapons of warfare to be used by the militia, such as swords, guns, rifles, and muskets,—arms to be used in defending the State and civil liberty,—and not to pistols, bowie-knife, brass knuckles, billies, and such other weapons . . . .

In short, Workman held that weapons of war are protected by the Second Amendment but found weapons like the billy are not weapons of war, and therefore are not protected.

Workman was wrong in concluding the Second Amendment does not cover arms like the pistol and the billy.…

The Second Amendment protects a citizen’s right to defend one’s self with dangerous and lethal firearms. But not everybody wants to carry a firearm for self defense. Some prefer less-lethal weapons. A billy is a less-lethal weapon that may be used for self-defense.

It is a simple weapon that most anybody between the ages of eight and eighty can fashion from a wooden stick, or a clothes pole, or a dowel rod. One can easily imagine countless citizens carrying these weapons on daily walks and hikes to defend themselves against attacks by humans or animals. To give full life to the core right of self-defense, every law-abiding responsible individual citizen has a constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms like the billy for lawful purposes.


America Has a State-Approved Domestic Terrorism Problem

During my internet perusing, I came across a post from comedian Kurt Metzger who had one of his shows canceled, alongside a few other comedians, at a comedy venue called “Capitol Hill” in Seattle. Why?

Because these comedians didn’t have the same “progressive” values as the surrounding community. Metzger notes that this comedy club is in the same district where the failed “CHAZ” encampment was created. You may recall that CHAZ was an attempt at creating an independent country with America based on the communist system that ended up being a place of murder, destruction, and flat-out idiocy.

These were communists, after all, but I digress.

Metzger posted the email he received about the cancelation of his show in full. Give it a read, and as you read it, try to notice the tone of it.

The letter isn’t rude or condescending, or at least it doesn’t come off that way. After reading it a few times, it comes off more as being written out of fear.

Notice the language being used in it. Emphasis mine.

“…we’ve received significant feedback expressing concerns about the alignment of these upcoming shows with the neighborhood’s ethos.”

“Given the feedback and to avoid any potential negative impact on both our club and the artists involved, as well as to maintain harmony within our community…”

“…we want to ensure it does not reflect on your talent and the quality of your work but is instead a reflection of our commitment to our community’s values.”

This reads like a letter that the writer, Jes Anderson, didn’t want to write. It’s incredibly complimentary to the comedians and it’s clear that they do not want to close the door on them forever, but there’s repeated language that reads like appeasement and assurances that they’re on the same side of the community in question.

This is a letter that they knew would be read by multiple groups, not just the comedians and the ticket holders. Looking at it closely, this letter looks more like someone trying to avert the very literal destruction of their club and harm of their employees, patrons, and talent than it does anything else.

If this was a city where the politicians and local law enforcement didn’t tolerate crime and violence, guarantee this letter wouldn’t have been written. Sadly, this is Seattle, where a hostile takeover of a city block is nicknamed the “Summer of Love” by the city’s mayor.

What this has created is nothing short of state-approved domestic terrorism. This is what this comedy club is trying to avoid. Since it knows these lunatics will continue to haunt and hound the venue to no end, vandalizing and destroying what it can, it’s left to capitulation and knee-bending.

And this is a problem happening in many blue cities.

In today’s America, domestic terrorism is alive and well. Many citizens live in fear of it and even many corporations have decided to pack up and leave blue cities where crime has gotten so out of control that it’s effectively ruled by criminals.

This problem is only going to get worse as criminal elements continue to flow freely into the country. I don’t think I need to emphasize the importance of voting accordingly for leaders that will come stock with a zero-tolerance policy in the coming years.

Cities like Seattle and Portland are just examples of what could happen to any city if it doesn’t begin practicing a heavy crackdown on crime now, but as for cities like these, I’m not sure what can save them except for a complete and total cultural overhaul that focuses on the residents and communities truly becoming intolerant to the criminal element among them.

But hopefully, that will happen soon. These kinds of people don’t stay contained in the cities they start in. They travel and they become everyone else’s problem as they do.

They might be safe in Smurf-blue cities like Seattle, but the moment they step foot into a territory where that level of thuggery isn’t tolerated, politicians and law enforcement need to come down hard. At the very least, they need to be taught they can’t do it outside their “safe” cities.

Katie Daviscourt
I’ll never forget the FBI calling me into their office in Seattle in 2020.
They were looking for footage of a suspect I had taken during one of the many riots. That’s when I asked them about Antifa.

The FBI agent told me Antifa was NOT a cause of concern, nor were they a terror group.
That’s when I lost all respect for the agency and refused to take any further calls.

I watched Antifa assault police, press, and innocent bystanders, as well as burn Seattle and Portland to the ground for nine months.
All without repercussions.

Imagine if a conservative did this?

You have to figure that these are the best takes they could get out of him. And they even added captions to cover for his slurring words.

FBI Reportedly Harvesting Publicly Available “Weapon” Info

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is initiating Project Tyr, an effort in its infancy to employ Amazon’s artificial intelligence-driven Rekognition cloud service to identify firearms—among other things—and the people associated with them. According to the bureau’s description (on the last page) the software “… offers pre trained and customizable computer vision (CV) capabilities to extract information and insights from lawfully acquired images and videos. Currently in initiation phase to customize to review and identify items containing nudity, weapons, explosives, and other identifying information.”

The news came as a shock to a digital community primarily concerned about privacy and inaccurate facial recognition. Amazon placed a moratorium on law enforcement’s use of Rekognition’s facial recognition software in June 2020, extended the moratorium in 2021 and released a statement explaining the latest FBI effort will only use the program’s other assets.

“Rekognition is an image and video analysis service that has many non-facial analysis and comparison features,” Amazon spokesperson Duncan Neasham explained to FedScoop, the outlet that broke the news on January 25. “Nothing in the Department of Justice’s disclosure indicates the FBI is violating the moratorium in any way.”

The initiative may be fueled, in part, by the number of convicted felons willing to post photos of themselves on social media while holding a gun and/or clearly stating ownership. That violation of the law has helped re-incarcerate criminals in FloridaIndianaIowaMassachusettsNebraska and dozens, if not hundreds, of others in the last year alone.

Identifying those instances falls well within the FBI’s website stated goal to, “… protect the American people and uphold the U.S. Constitution.” Today, its team of roughly 35,000 relies heavily on the latest forensic and investigative technology and routinely explores innovative new techniques, including this one. Precisely how it will harness Rekognition or the baseline used in the search for firearms—and whether that information is cataloged—has yet to be announced.

The Federal Government is not alone in its reliance on sometimes controversial software, however. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the New York City Police Department, for example, has been using facial recognition since 2011, can put 19 drones in the air, has video monitoring for loitering and more. For a look at systems employed by your city, county and state the organization has a free and easy-to-use Atlas of Surveillance online.


How Joe Biden’s Office of Gun Violence Prevention is directing the war on guns

The White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention has become a significant threat to our guns and our civil rights.

When the office was unveiled in September 2023, President Joe Biden said it would, “centralize, accelerate, and intensify our work to save more lives more quickly. That’s what it was designed to do. It will drive and coordinate a government and nationwide effort to reduce gun violence.”

The office wields tremendous power but operates in secrecy, without oversight. It has no website. Its budget has never been made public. Its staffing levels are not known. Only three actual members have ever been identified — the director and two deputy directors. All three are radical anti-gun zealots. One has a long association with former President Barack Obama.

Neither Biden nor Vice President Kamala Harris, who oversees the office — at least officially — has ever clearly articulated what the office is supposed to do, other than “reduce gun violence” and “build on historic actions taken by President Biden to end gun violence.”

Biden’s “historic actions” are well known and include calls for red flag laws; universal background checks, which would open the door to firearm registration; banning popular semi-automatic firearms and standard capacity magazines; revoking licenses of gun dealers for minor clerical errors; and pushing Congress to pass laws that would force gun owners to comply with firearm storage regulations, which would likely be followed by mandatory home inspections to insure compliance.

Using open-source and other data, the Second Amendment Foundation examined the office’s key personnel, budget and operations. The findings reveal a Star Chamber of sorts, designed to come up with ways to chip away at the Second Amendment and then push them out to the states, without any scrutiny from Congress, the courts or the public.

“For the first time in the history of the United States a president has created an office within the White House solely to find ways to circumvent and violate the Constitution,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “And do not forget that taxpayer dollars are supporting this abomination. We are paying the Biden-Harris administration to violate our civil rights.”

Continue reading “”

Gun Control and Government Corruption Collide in Chicago Suburb

Police in Dolton, Illinois could soon be walking their beat instead of cruising the streets of the Chicago suburb after a bank moved to repossess much of the police department’s fleet of vehicles for non-payment. According to KS StateBank, the village is behind on its payments to the tune of $76,000, and the bank has been unable to reach anyone at City Hall who could rectify the problem.

Burt Odelson, the legislative counsel for the Village of Dolton Board of Trustees, says the board authorized the payments last May, and he and others are pinning the blame for the snafu on Dolton’s anti-gun mayor Tiffany Henyard.

As questions over unpaid bills have come to light in recent months, WGN Investigates previously uncovered exorbitant spending on lavish trips and experiences by Henyard, which included a trip to Las Vegas that cost more than $12,000 and fell in the same month the loan payment on the village vehicles was due.

… Village of Dolton trustees have gone head-to-head with Henyard at village meetings, calling for transparency, so residents know where taxpayer dollars are going.

“The residents of Dolton deserve to know how the money is being spent,” trustee Brittney Norwood told WGN-TV Thursday.

The board of trustees is in charge of overseeing finances, but some said Henyard has restricted them from access to village financial records, leaving them mostly in the dark. On top of that, several trustees told WGN News Thursday they recently heard from several vendors who claimed they were hired by the mayor for work and never paid for their services. The village is in millions in debt, and did not approve of those expenses, Norwood told WGN.

There’ve been questions about Henyard’s spending for years now. Back in 2021, Second Amendment advocate John Boch detailed that the mayor of the village was doling out hundreds of thousands of dollars annually for a team of officers to serve as her personal security detail, even as she was calling on lawmakers to pass more gun control laws that would make it harder for Dolton residents to protect themselves. The three officers, which accounted for almost 1/10th of the entire police force, cost taxpayers about $100,000 a year each, even though they were tasked almost exclusively with shadowing the small-town mayor.

To put that into perspective, that’s the same number of bodyguards that protect Birmingham, Alabama’s mayor but that city has almost ten times the population of Dolton.

At the same time, Mayor Henyard’s armed personal security detail affords her far more protection than the residents of her city enjoy. One of her first acts after taking office involved organizing an “anti-violence” march. She was joined at that march by anti-gun activist and accused pedophile Father Michael Pfleger.

Henyard was actually recalled by residents in 2022, but the recall election was ruled invalid by state courts and she’s remained in office ever since. With the next mayoral election not scheduled until 2025, there’s no telling how much of a financial hole the village will find itself between now and next November, but it sounds like it’s a distinct possibility that the Dolton Police Department is going to be crippled by the repossession of much of its fleet. I’m guessing that Henyard will ensure that there’s still money to pay for her team of bodyguards or hire convicted child sex offenders for positions that require them to enter residents’ homes, but everyone else who lives in the village is going to be impacted by the financial mismanagement at City Hall.

It’s pretty clear given her anti-gun activism that Henyard doesn’t want those folks to be able to protect themselves with a firearm, and based on the complaints from the trustees and their attorneys it might not be long before Dolton PD isn’t in a position to serve and protect the community at large either. What are they supposed to do to keep themselves and their families safe? I guess the obvious answer is “run for mayor”, since it sounds like Henyard is the one person in Dolton who’s guaranteed to be protected by armed individuals who are still legally allowed to purchase and possess so-called assault weapons and large capacity magazines for the mayor’s defense.

Soon to be followed by demand for book titles owned and what religion is practiced……..

California Democrats Introduce Bill That Would Force Homeowners and Renters to Disclose Number of Firearms to Insurance Companies, Government

For years, California Democrats have been hostile to gun owners. California Democrats frequently attempt to erode Second Amendment rights in the state.

A bill in the Democrat-controlled California State Assembly that was introduced on February 16th, would force homeowners and renters to disclose information about firearms they own. Assembly member Mike Gipson, and State Senator Catherine Blakespear are the two leading California Democrat lawmakers pushing this legislation.

Section 2086 will be an addition to the Insurance Code pertaining to AB-3067.

The questions include information as to the number of firearms in the home, the method of storage, and how many firearms are stored in vehicles on the property. The questions include whether or not the firearms are in locked containers or not.

Even The Washington Post Concedes the Biden Administration’s Favorite Gun Control Lie Is, In Fact, a Lie.

It was a “The Pigs are Flying” moment after The Washington Post, the newspaper that has never found a gun control policy it did not fawn over, took up a gun control claim the Biden administration loves to repeat and determined it to be false.

To be clear, Glenn Kessler’s The Fact Checker couldn’t bring itself to award any Pinocchios – not one – to the false claim, but its thorough breakdown and analysis of the claim left nothing misunderstood. Saying that “Gun violence is the leading cause of death for children” is patently “Not True.”

We won’t hold our collective breaths for The White House to issue a formal statement acknowledging their repeated lie. Instead, we’re assuming President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, White House officials and gun control activists will simply continue repeating the false claim. And notwithstanding The Washington Post’s fact checking, this lie will likely continue to be uncritically reported as “fact” by the mainstream media.

Still, having The Washington Post take up the claim and acknowledge it is false should be deserving of at least a little praise.

Favorite False Claim

President Biden has repeated the claim often as he pushes again and again for more gun control. He began his campaign for the presidency in 2019 by calling firearm manufacturers “the enemy.” He now uses the “firearms are the leading cause of death for children” to push ever more restrictions on the Second Amendment while saying little to nothing about holding violent criminals accountable, let alone calling out soft-on-crime prosecutors who let those same criminals back out on the streets to commit more crimes.

Vice President Harris recited the false claim in two recent events in North Carolina and in Washington, D.C. The White House used the false claim as a lede in a recent press release announcing new White House unilateral gun control executive actions.

There’s no telling how often it has been repeated by U.S. Senators, Members of the House of Representatives, governors and any number of other local elected officials and gun control activists pushing the claim as a reason why more gun control is needed.

CBS Evening News ran a segment repeating the claim. So did ABC News.

Repeating the claim doesn’t change the fact that it is false.

Continue reading “”