Category: Government

Morrisey signs three pro-Second Amendment measures into law

BERKELEY SPRINGS–Gov. Patrick Morrisey, on Friday, signed three bills into law to protect the Second Amendment rights of West Virginians.

Joined by state legislators and local supporters at Cacapon Resort State Park, Morrisey spoke to the freedoms sought and earned by West Virginians.

“We have an amazing state motto: ‘Mountaineers are always free,’” Morrisey said. “We should think about that every single day.”

He went on to say that those freedoms are given by God, not the government.

“It’s our job as legislators to safeguard those liberties at all costs,” he said.

In a move to enhance the state’s strong support of the Second Amendment and to battle against individuals on the far left who have and will continue to attempt to take away those gun rights, he signed House Bill 2067, House Bill 3342 and Senate Bill 270 into law.

“The far left has tried to take away our Second Amendment rights. We’ve learned about their schemes,” Morrisey said. “My goal is to stay one step ahead of the radical gun-grabbers and government elites,” he continued as he stepped forward to sign three bills that he said protect the rights of West Virginians.

HB 2067 ensures that firearm companies are not unfairly held liable for the actions of those who use their products.

“The far left has pushed to sue gun manufacturers for the actions of criminals,” Morrisey said. “That’s just wrong.”

HB 3342 prohibits banks that contract with the state from discriminating against a firearm entity or firearm trade association. Morrisey said that in West Virginia, big financial institutions will not be allowed to de-bank companies in the firearms business or the trade associations.

Finally, SB 270 prohibits the government from suspending gun rights during declared emergencies or disaster responses. While West Virginia did not face the issue during the pandemic, Morrisey said that it was only because practices were put in place at the time.

Continue reading “”

IA Governor Reynolds Inks Bill to Lower Carry Age to 18

Democrat anti-gunners are predicting bad times ahead in Iowa, where Gov. Kim Reynolds has signed legislation lowering the age for owning and carrying handguns to 18, but supporters of the measure, which takes effect July 1, say it’s time to recognize the rights of young adults.

According to the Des Moines Register, the legislation, known as House File 924, was supported by nearly all Republicans and opposed by nearly all Democrats.

KGAN News noted the bill “sparked strong opinions on both sides.”

The station quoted Democrat Rep. Lindsay James of Dubuque, stating, “I have always been a supporter of common-sense gun safety, and so I did not vote for that particular piece of legislation primarily because of my concerns around young people and increased violence on high school and college campuses.”

She was further quoted arguing, “We just saw a shooting at Florida State, and so there’s a lot of concern about 18-year-olds being able to conceal handguns and bring them into their schools.”

However, the FSU shooting involved a suspect who did not have a license to carry, and was using a firearm allegedly belonging to his stepmother.

On the other side, the Des Moines Register reported Rep. Steven Holt, a Denison Republican, stating, “I joined the Marines when I was 18, I graduated from boot camp when I was 18. I was carrying firearms in the military, ready to defend my country when I was 18, along with hundreds of thousands of other young men and women. So the idea that an 18-year-old, a 19-year-old, a 20-year-old, doesn’t have a right to own a firearm in protection of their families — which is really what the Second Amendment is about, right?”

As noted by the Des Moines newspaper, HB 924 “The bill follows several recent court decisions across the country, including in New Orleans, Virginia and Minnesota, that ruled against the federal law requiring Americans to be 21 to buy handguns.”

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms applauded Gov. Reynolds for signing the measure.

“This is a major victory for young adults in Iowa,” said CCRKBA Managing Director Andrew Gottlieb, “and it could have a future ripple effect which other states can follow. It recognizes that citizens in the 18-to-20-year age group should have full rights, since they can already enlist in the military, get married, start businesses, run for office, sign contracts, buy homes and vote. Why shouldn’t young adults be able to own and carry a sidearm for personal protection?”

Gov. Gianforte to Gunmakers Fleeing Colorado’s Firearm Ban: ‘Montana Is Open for Business’

Anticipating the rush of gunmakers fleeing Colorado after the state’s recent adoption of a semiautomatic firearm ban, Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) is letting the manufacturers know: “Montana is open for business.”

Breitbart News reported that Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed the semiautomatic firearm ban on April 10, 2025, and it takes effect in August 2026. In addition to banning America’s most popular rifle–the AR-15–Colorado’s ban also prohibits AK-47s, numerous semiautomatic shotguns, and even a number of pistols.

Gov. Gianforte released a video on April 23, 2025, describing Colorado’s new gun control as “one of the most restrictive gun bans ever adopted in the United States.”

He noted that the gun control bans not only the selling of numerous semiautomatic firearms, but also the manufacturing of the guns.

By subscribing, you agree to our terms of use & privacy policy. You will receive email marketing messages from Breitbart News Network to the email you provide. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Gianforte noted, “This is on top of the liberal state’s existing ban on ‘high capacity’ magazines. That’s just crazy.”

He then pointed out, “Colorado is ranked in the top 10 states with the biggest gun industries. So, to all gun manufacturers in Colorado, my question is simple: Do you want to move back to America? Montana is open for business.”

A press release accompanying the video noted that Montana is a constitutional carry state which “[prohibits] the enforcement of any federal law, executive order, rule, or regulation that infringes upon ownership, possession, transfer, or use of any firearm, magazine, or firearm accessory.”

Gianforte summarized his message by saying, “In Montana, we embrace freedom and the free enterprise system. Come on home to America, right here in Montana.”

Trump’s mass deportation raids result in 655% spike in arrests of terrorists roaming US — including one of India’s ‘most wanted’.

The Trump administration’s mass deportation raids have nabbed more than 200 known or suspected terrorists since January — including one of India’s “most wanted,” who is accused of masterminding a grenade attack on a cop there and has ties to a US-designated terrorist organization in Pakistan.

Since President Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have arrested 219 known or alleged terrorists, marking a 655% increase from the same period last year when 29 such arrests were made under former President Joe Biden, according to new Homeland Security data obtained by The Post.

ICE agents nab suspected terrorist Harpreet Singh last week in Sacramento, California.ICE agents nabbed suspected Indian terrorist Harpreet Singh last week in Sacramento, California.ICE

Among the dozens of terrorists swept up in Trump’s raids was Harpreet Singh, a citizen of India who entered the US illegally on Jan. 27, 2022 by crossing from Mexico into Arizona and was swiftly released into the country by Border Patrol agents with a future court date, a DHS official said.

The Biden administration is to blame for allowing Singh to roam the country for more than three years, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told The Post.

“The Biden administration not only let a wanted terrorist into our country, but after he was arrested by Border Patrol agents, they released him into the interior of our country,” she charged.

“While shocking, it’s not surprising given the Biden administration routinely released unvetted terrorists and criminals into American communities,” she added.

Singh is one of his home country’s “most wanted men” for providing terrorist funds, recruitment and planning of a grenade attack on an Indian Police Station and on a retired Punjab cop’s house with the intent to kill and instill fear among law enforcement officers, according to DHS.

Continue reading “”

Missouri Lawmakers Resurrect Second Amendment Preservation Act

When Missouri lawmakers passed the “Second Amendment Protection Act” in 2021 and Republican Gov. Mike Parson signed it into law, anti-gun advocates immediately challenged the law in court. Ultimately, a circuit court deemed the law unconstitutional, and enforcement was blocked.

Now, a Missouri state senator and state representative have introduced similar measures that they believe will have the same effect and will pass court muster.

As a little background, the law, introduced and passed in response to several anticipated bills that would be overreach on Second Amendment freedoms during the early days of the Biden Administration, forbade police from enforcing federal gun laws that didn’t have an equivalent state law. Law enforcement agencies with officers who knowingly enforced federal gun laws without equivalent state laws faced a fine of $50,000 per violating officer.

At the time, Gov. Parson said the unique law “draws a line in the sand and demonstrates our commitment to reject any attempt by the federal government to circumvent the fundamental right Missourians have to keep and bear arms to protect themselves and their property.”

The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Missouri in February 2022, arguing that the law obstructed cooperation between federal and state governments. A lower court ruled the bill unconstitutional, citing the Constitution’s supremacy clause that prioritizes federal law above state law.

On appeal, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the ruling. At the time, Chief Judge Steven Colloton wrote in the ruling: “A State cannot invalidate federal law to itself. Missouri does not seriously contest these bedrock principles of our constitutional structure.”

One of the new measures, Senate Bill 23 by Sen. Rick Brattin, would have much the same effect. But Sen. Brattin said it is written so it will pass court muster this time.

Sen. Brattin told the Senate Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee that the new version is a “reshuffling” of the bill to put it in accordance with the parameters of the Eighth Circuit Court’s ruling. The new version presents updated language in the bill’s statement of purpose and removes explicit references to federal agencies, centering the bill instead on state and local offices.

“This isn’t coming and reinventing the wheel,” Sen. Brattin told the committee. “This is just clarifying and making it in line with what the Eighth Courts have done.”

Continue reading “”

Republican Lawmaker Takes Aim at IRS Guns

Today is tax day for most Americans. Some of us have extensions due to natural disasters, but most of you who haven’t already are probably working on your taxes today, and you’re probably thinking about how much you dislike the IRS.No one likes them.

But something that I’ve always found perplexing is that they have armed IRS agents.

I get that they’re in charge of enforcing the tax code, but they’re still the IRS. They’re not a law enforcement agency, but a revenue collection agency. Their job isn’t to kick in doors and make arrests, so why do they have so many guns?

Well, one lawmaker has introduced a bill to fix that.

U.S. Rep. Barry Moore (R-Enterprise) introduced the Why Does the IRS Need Guns Act on Monday.

The bill:

  • Prohibits the IRS from using appropriated funds to purchase, receive, or store any firearm or ammunition
  • Requires the IRS to transfer to the GSA any firearms or ammunition owned or under the control of the IRS
  • Within 30 days of transfer, GSA must initiate the sale or auction of any firearms to licensed dealers and the auction of any ammo to the general public

Moore told 1819 News on Monday, “We’re going to try to force them to get rid of the ammunition and weapons they’ve bought since 2020.”

That’s a solid start.

However, there are a lot of federal agencies that have guns when they probably shouldn’t. I recall one story years ago where a tactical team from the Department of Education showed up at someone’s house regarding student loans. I don’t recall the specifics, but the fact that the Department of Education has a tactical team is more than a little troubling.

NASA and the Department of Energy have those, too, but I get why they have them. Rocket fuel would be beneficial to terrorists, as would sabotaging a nuclear reactor. Having heavily armed personnel on site makes sense for those two agencies.

For most other agencies, though, I don’t see why they need any such thing. If they need a door kicked down, that should fall to the FBI or some other relevant federal law enforcement agency.

So disarming the IRS is a good start, and I hope this bill passes, but I’d rather it be a bit more expansive than that.

While the federal government has spent years trying to disarm the American people, it’s been arming just about every governmental entity it can, which is not how the balance of power is supposed to work in this country. The militarization of federal agencies–agencies that are not law enforcement agencies–is a troubling phenomenon that no one should ever be comfortable with.

Like the man in the comic turned movie said, “People should not be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.” That’s a lot harder to make happen when even the Department of Education has a heavily-armed tactical team. Especially when our own arms have been neutered by a century of gun control laws.

Starting with the IRS is fine, but the line cannot be allowed to be drawn there. More needs to be done.

Here’s hoping, though.

Missouri House Votes to Allow Guns on Public Transit, Lower Concealed Carry Age

The Missouri House just sent a clear message: gun rights shouldn’t stop at the bus stop.

In a 106-45 vote on Thursday, lawmakers passed House Bill 328, a measure that would legalize concealed carry on public transit and lower the minimum age for a concealed carry permit from 19 to 18. The bill now heads to the Missouri Senate for consideration.

Currently, even Missourians with valid concealed carry permits are barred from bringing firearms onto public transportation. But that could soon change if HB 328 becomes law.

“It’s about time that we allow those people who use public transportation to exercise the same rights as everyone else in our state,” said Rep. Tim Taylor (R-Bunceton), the bill’s sponsor. For many gun rights advocates, the current law forces permit holders to disarm just because they choose to ride the bus or train.

Opposition to the bill was sharp, with critics arguing that expanding where guns can legally go won’t improve public safety.

“More access to guns does nothing to improve public safety,” claimed Rep. Yolanda Young (D-Kansas City).

House Minority Leader Ashley Aune (D-Kansas City) also criticized the measure, especially the portion lowering the permit age to 18.

“That means high school kids could legally carry concealed weapons,” she said. “What could go wrong with that?”

But under current Missouri law, 18-year-olds serving in the military can already obtain a concealed carry permit. This bill would expand that access to all 18-year-olds, not just those in uniform.

Supporters argue that if an 18-year-old is legally an adult and can vote, sign contracts, and serve in the armed forces, they should also be trusted to carry concealed—especially in environments like public transit where law enforcement may not be readily available.

As the bill moves to the Senate, it’s expected to generate even more debate over where the line should be drawn between public safety and Second Amendment rights.

Gun Rights Group to Bondi: Target 2A Violations in 12 Specific States

Six days after U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced creation of the Department of Justice “Second Amendment Task Force” to protect Americans’ gun rights, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms sent a letter urging her to immediately focus the task force’s attention on 12 specific states where alleged “egregious violations” are occurring.

Those states are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Washington. The common denominator in all these states is a Democrat-controlled legislature and governor’s office.

As reported earlier by Ammoland, activists energized by Bondi’s announcement are calling for action in their states, many of which coincidentally happen to be on the above list.

Continue reading “”

ATF Deputy Director Marvin Richardson Forced To Retire

Marvin Richardson, long-time Deputy Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), has been fast-tracked to the unemployment line after he was given the option of voluntary retirement or forced removal. Richardson had been with the ATF for decades, serving under numerous administrations with his record stretching back to the 1993 conflict in Waco, Texas, leaving seventy-six Branch Davidians dead, including over twenty children, a massacre for which he was awarded the Treasury Department’s Hostile Action Medal.

Richardson is the latest holdover to part ways with the ATF as the Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) under Pam Bondi seeks to clean house at the agency after its political weaponization by the Biden administration. Earlier this year, ATF Chief Counsel and fellow anti-gun sweetheart Pam Hicks received her walking papers and was subsequently replaced by Second Amendment scholar and professor, Robert Leider, but not before doing her fair share of damage alongside Richardson by targeting the firearms industry and American gun owners with unconstitutional regulation and prosecution for years.

Richardson, who saw pistol stabilizing braces as an affront to his beloved infringement, the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA), was an instrumental force behind the ATF’s declaration of war on Americans who had equipped firearms with them based on the agency’s previous rules declaring braces a non-NFA accessory. He was also one of the key tools in the Biden administration’s attack on privately manufactured firearms, for which the left has now attached the made-up moniker, “ghost gun.”

Continue reading “”

Latest Moves to Reign In ATF Overreach are Welcome Blows Against the Anti-Gun Bureaucracy.

There really isn’t any line that anti-gun politicians won’t cross in order to undermine the Second Amendment. None. I remember several years ago when I was working for U.S. Senator Bill Roth (R-DE) – yeah, the Roth in Roth IRA – in his Wilmington office. There was a proposal to tax ammunition. This wasn’t the 11% excise tax we’re all familiar with, already pay, and never really see.

No, this was a tax designed to punish gun owners, to hurt them — significantly — right in their wallets. A couple of variations of this kind of tax were being considered or floated. If I remember correctly, the one at the time was either a 25% tax on handgun ammunition, or even a $0.25 per round tax.

I asked the Senator his opinion on an ammunition tax and his reply was quintessential Bill Roth. He looked at me and said, “It’s a tax. I’m against taxes.” He wasn’t concerned about the tax as an attack on the Second Amendment. He saw it as yet another attack on taxpayers.

Taxation is the primary weapon for politicians looking to take something away from citizens. The problem for them, however, is that new tax bills are harder and harder to pass as the majority of taxpayers are kind of tired of paying more and receiving little to nothing in return.

Knowing this, the Biden Administration sought to press its anti-gun agenda, in part, through overly aggressive enforcement by the federal firearm regulatory bureaucracy. By taking a zero tolerance approach to even the smallest clerical mistakes made by gun dealers, the Biden Administration would use ATF to strip retailers of their licenses to sell guns.

While this was pitched to the media and the public as zero tolerance, what they really should have called it was zero chance, as in there was virtually zero chance the agency wouldn’t be taking your FFL, because they were determined to find something. And that’s exactly how many retailers viewed it.

Fortunately, not every ATF agent doing FFL inspections was hellbent on pulling licenses and was willing to see simple clerical errors for what they were, unintentional minor mistakes that are easily rectified. In other words, they made a ‘no harm, no foul’ call.

Unfortunately, though, there were ATF agents who were more than willing to be weaponized by the agency’s leadership against FFLs lawfully conducting business. Maybe they saw this as a pathway to promotion within an administration that placed a lot of value on blindly following orders from the Autopen-in-Chief.

On Monday news came that the era of zero-tolerance was over. The National Shooting Sports Foundation heralded the announcement from the Trump Administration in Monday’s edition of Bullet Points.

NSSF praises the announcement today by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that the agencies are doing away with the Biden-era “zero-tolerance” policy that punished lawful and highly-regulated Federal Firearm Licensees (FFLs) for minor clerical errors.

The administration’s announcement also noted that the Biden-era regulatory policies on “engaged in the business” and pistol stabilizing braces would be reconsidered. Both of which were viewed – rightly – as regulatory overreach by the agency on issues that should have been addressed legislatively by Congress.

Where exactly we go from here is hard to predict, but Monday’s announcement is a very good sign that government of the people, by the people, for the people hasn’t succumbed to the Biden-era alternative of government of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, for the bureaucrats.

For right now it’s good riddance to some pernicious antigun regulatory overreach. We all know, however, that bureaucrats are going to bureaucrat because that’s the only thing they know how to do. And their turn will no doubt come again. Here’s hoping Revenge of the Bureaucrats doesn’t hit theaters anytime soon.

 

DoD Courts Service Members Wrongfully Discharged for Not Getting the COVID Jab.

The Pentagon has begun sending letters of apology to thousands of service members who were discharged from military service for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The Pentagon is also trying to assist these service members if they wish to return to active duty.

“They never should have had to leave military service, and the department is committed to assisting them in their return,” Tim Hill, the Defense Department’s acting deputy undersecretary of personnel and readiness, told reporters. He added that President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are “eager to welcome back those who are impacted” by the Pentagon’s 2021 vaccine mandate.

In August 2021, then-Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered the vaccine mandate, claiming it was critical in keeping service members ready to fight. It was so critical that the Pentagon dropped the rule in January 2023.

Almost 9,000 service members refused vaccination and were dismissed from the armed forces. The effort to get them to reenlist includes telephone calls, emails, website information, and social media posts.

Donald Trump issued an executive order on January 27, reinstating service members discharged under the Pentagon’s COVID vaccine mandate.

“In spite of the scientific evidence, the Biden Administration discharged healthy service members—many of whom had natural immunity and dedicated their entire lives to serving our country—for refusing the COVID vaccine,” a fact sheet released with the executive order said. “Government redress of these wrongful dismissals is overdue.”

Military Times:

Service members who involuntarily separated would be granted the opportunity to receive back pay for the time they otherwise would’ve been in the military, Hill said. It would include base pay, allowance for housing and subsistence and potentially medical benefits. The back pay calculation would also factor in other forms of compensation a service member received while out of service, including salary and health care.

These benefits would only apply to service members who seek to return under the new Trump administration guidelines and would not retroactively apply to those who had returned after the 2023 rescission, a number Hill estimated at under 80 service members.

“It’s also something we can seek to address but there is not currently a mechanism,” he said.

The enlistment period would be either two or four years, and there are other administrative hurdles that an applicant would have to get over in order to rejoin.

There’s also a question of back pay and the fact that most of the service members lost considerable pay because they didn’t get promotions and pay raises.

“How can the department make them whole so that they would stand financially in the same position they would’ve stood in had they never been discharged?” asked Hill.

Returning service members would also be assessed for medical retention standards — a test to determine whether someone who’s already been serving in the military is fit to continue — rather than traditional accession standards, which encompass a much higher level of scrutiny used to determine whether an individual prior to military experience is fit to join the military.

The Army has reenlisted more than 23 soldiers who were discharged for refusing the vaccine as of Monday, the AP reported. None of the other services had completed reenlistments yet, but all are reaching out to former troops.

According to Army spokesman Christopher Surridge, about 400 soldiers have inquired so far about the reenlistment program, the AP reported. Of those, about 100 are in the application process. The Army did not have estimates on how much it has given the soldiers in total back pay.

There’s a lot to sort out, and given the Biden administration’s reluctance to reach out to discharged service members, it’s not surprising that less than 700 service members have expressed any interest in reenlisting.

DOJ and ATF Repeal Zero Tolerance Policy, Major Second Amendment Win for the Trump Administration

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 7, 2025

Washington, D.C. – In a significant win for the Second Amendment, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) announced today the repeal of the controversial Federal Firearms Administrative Action Policy, also known as the Zero Tolerance Policy. First introduced under the Biden administration, the policy aggressively targeted gun dealers for minor paperwork errors—creating fear and uncertainty across the firearms community.

The decision to roll back this anti-gun policy comes under the direction of the Trump administration and marks a key step toward restoring Americans’ access to firearms. The DOJ and ATF, now led by Attorney General Pam Bondi and Acting ATF and FBI Director Kash Patel, will also begin formal reviews of the tyrannical stabilizing brace rule and the unlawful “engaged in the business” rule used to target private gun sellers.

The stabilizing brace rule, which attempted to reclassify braced pistols as short-barreled rifles under the National Firearms Act, and the “engaged in the business” rule, which was a backdoor attempt to create Universal Background Checks, were both the subject of national backlash and multiple court challenges.

Gun Owners of America has long sounded the alarm on the weaponization of the ATF under the Biden administration, where bureaucratic overreach was used to harass law-abiding gun dealers and crush small businesses. The so-called “Zero Tolerance” Policy wasn’t about safety—it was about control. GOA and Gun Owners Foundation responded with force, filing two major federal lawsuits: Kiloton Tactical v. ATF and Morehouse Enterprises, LLC v. ATF (II). Today’s repeal is a direct result of sustained legal and grassroots pressure—and a clear sign that this administration is serious about restoring constitutional order.

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

“For years, the Zero Tolerance Policy has been a tool of political retribution—targeting gun stores and Americans who were simply trying to exercise their rights. We applaud President Trump, Attorney General Bondi, and Director Kash Patel for listening to gun owners and taking action to repeal this abusive policy. This is what pro-gun leadership looks like.”

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

“Under President Trump’s leadership, we’re seeing a realignment toward the Constitution. This repeal and regulatory review of ATF’s “Zero Tolerance” Policy sends a clear message that the era of Biden gun control is over. GOA is grateful for the administration’s commitment to restoring Second Amendment rights and standing with law-abiding gun owners nationwide.”

GOA spokesmen are available for interviews. Gun Owners of America is a nonprofit grassroots lobbying organization dedicated to protecting the right to keep and bear arms without compromise. GOA represents over two million members and activists. For more information, visit GOA’s Press Center.

-GOA-

BLUF
the core purpose of these tariffs is to strengthen the U.S. economy by prioritizing American-made goods and industries.

And that’s what it’s all about.
This is how Trump did business before he was POTUS and does it today
The standard operational politicians still haven’t figured it out.
(Or have, and are against it as it conflicts against their own agendas)

Trump’s Tariffs Shake the World: 50 Countries Already Fold as ‘America First’ Strategy Takes Hold

Nearly just a week, after President Donald Trump’s bold new tariffs took effect, over 50 countries, are already at the negotiating table, signaling that the global economic landscape is shifting in favor of American interests. The ten percent universal tariff on imports and reciprocal tariffs targeting roughly 90 nations are proving to be a wake-up call for the world.

Countries that once took advantage of unfair trade practices are now scrambling to strike better deals, understanding that America is no longer willing to play the role of the passive consumer. Trump’s “America First” approach is pushing nations to reconsider their trade practices, and it’s clear that the President’s strategy of economic toughness is beginning to pay off.

During an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Agricultural Secretary Brooke Rollins acknowledged that Trump’s tariffs have already forced other nations to bend to America’s will. She emphasized that the core purpose of these tariffs is to strengthen the U.S. economy by prioritizing American-made goods and industries. Rollins acknowledged that while the immediate impact of the tariffs may be harsh to digest, the long-term benefits for the country will be significant. She clarified that Trump’s bold policies are laying the groundwork for a more resilient and self-sufficient economy.

“We do already live under a tariff regime in this country, but it’s the tariff regime of China, of Mexico, of Brazil, of Australia, of countries that Mexico won’t take our corn, Australia won’t take our beef,” Rollins said. “The country of Honduras takes more pork than the entire European Union does, American pork, I should say. So, from our farming and ranching perspective, which is what I’m focused on, but happy to talk about anything that it has to, it is time for a change. That’s what this president evoked last Wednesday.”

“We already have 50 countries that have come to the table over the last few days, over the last weeks, that are willing and desperate to talk to us. We are the economic engine of the world, and it’s finally time that someone, President Trump, stood up for America,” she continued.

Trump has implemented a 34 percent tariff on Chinese imports, which is set to take effect next week. In response, Beijing revealed that it would impose a matching 34 percent tariff on American goods starting April 10. In addition, the president will impose two significant tariffs to boost U.S. manufacturing, create jobs, and increase government revenue. On April 9, a ten percent blanket tariff will be imposed on all imports, alongside reciprocal tariffs on goods from approximately 90 countries.

The new measures are part of the administration’s strategy to revive American industry and ensure fair trade practices. Among the nations facing steep tariff hikes are Lesotho (50 percent), Cambodia (49 percent), and Madagascar (47 percent). Trump said the goal is to protect American workers and strengthen the country’s economy.

60 Days In, How Is AG Pamela Bondi Doing Defending the 2nd Amendment?

It’s been roughly 60 days since Pamela Bondi stepped up as Attorney General under President Trump, and the pro-gun community is talking.

For those of us who live and breathe the Second Amendment, a Trump appointee like Bondi comes with big expectations. Two months in, though, the word on platforms like X and in gun circles is a mixed bag. Is she the 2A defender we’ve been waiting for, or is she falling short?

The Good: Bondi’s Pro-Gun Moves

Bondi’s made some moves that have gun folks nodding in approval. In February, she fired the ATF’s General Counsel, Pamela Hicks, with a sharp statement: “These people were targeting gun owners. Not going to happen under this administration.”

That’s a solid hit against an agency we all see as overreaching. Then, in late March, she launched a DOJ investigation into Los Angeles County’s Second Amendment practices, declaring, “The Second Amendment is not a second-class right.” Pro-gun groups have given her a thumbs-up for that, calling it a strong first step.

These actions show she’s willing to push back on anti-gun efforts, and that’s got some folks hopeful.

The Bad: What’s Happening with Adamiak?

Then there’s the Patrick “Tate” Adamiak case, and it’s a sore spot. This former Navy sailor’s been in prison for 30 months, facing a 20-year sentence, all tied to what Lee Williams calls fake ATF evidence—think toy guns twisted into “machineguns” by a questionable ATF tech. Federal prosecutors under Bondi’s DOJ are still fighting his appeal, sticking to the ATF’s story. Lee’s recent article laid out the details, and the pro-gun reaction was fierce. Some asked why Bondi isn’t stepping in to stop this. Others demanded she sack the prosecutors involved.

For a guy who just wants to serve his country again, it’s tough to see her not acting. Is she too tied up, or is this not on her radar?

The Ugly: Trust Issues Hang Around

Here’s the kicker: Bondi’s got a past that doesn’t sit right with everyone. As Florida’s AG, she backed red flag laws and age restrictions for gun purchases after Parkland. That’s still fresh for a lot of gun owners—X posts from the last two months keep bringing it up, pointing to her “unconstitutional” stances. Even with her recent pro-2A actions, some see her as inconsistent. There’s grumbling that DOJ attorneys under her are still pushing anti-gun arguments in court, like in cases challenging young adults’ rights.

It feels like she’s half in the fight, half stuck in the old habits.

What’s the Buzz?

The pro-gun crowd’s divided. On X, some praise her ATF shakeup but say she needs to do more. Others argue she’s swamped fixing a messed-up system, the FBI Deputy Director, Dan Bongino, dropped a message saying, “Just because you don’t immediately see it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.” However, not everyone’s buying that excuse.

 

“A patriot’s losing his rights for what?” one voice shot back. There’s speculation she might not even know about Adamiak, with hopes pinned on a Trump pardon instead. Meanwhile, calls to flood her inbox and the White House with messages are gaining traction—complete with how-to guides floating around. The vibe? We’re watching closely and not staying quiet.

The Bottom Line

Bondi’s at a turning point. She’s got the power to be a Second Amendment hero, but she’s got to prove it. Firing ATF brass and probing LA County are big, but letting an innocent guy sit in jail while her team plays hardball? That’s a miss. Her past raises eyebrows, but her next moves could settle the score. Two months isn’t the whole story, but it’s enough to show where she’s leaning. Right now, it’s anyone’s guess.

SCOTUS Sides With Trump Admin 5-4, Stays Lower Court Ruling Compelling Teacher Training Grants

At last check, we were north of 160 federal lawsuits filed against Trump administration executive actions, and while the district courts have been furiously handing out temporary restraining orders (TROs) and injunctions, a number of the cases have been snaking their way up through the appellate courts to the Supreme Court. Mind you, these are largely procedural rulings rather than decisions on the merits. There’s still a long way to go before all the dust settles.

But the Trump administration scored a win before the Supreme Court Friday afternoon as the high court issued a 5-4 decision granting the administration’s request for a stay of a district court TRO, which enjoined the administration from terminating various education-related grants and required it to pay out past-due grant obligations and continue paying grant obligations as they accrue.

Here’s a bit more background:

A divided Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration by allowing officials to block $65 million in teacher development grants frozen over concerns they were promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices.

The 5-4 emergency ruling, for now, lifts a lower order that allowed the Education Department to resume the grants in eight Democratic-led states that are suing. …

In February, the administration began canceling disbursements under two federal education grants aimed at developing educators and combatting teacher shortages:  the Teacher Quality Partnership Program and the Supporting Effective Educator Development Program.

Officials have cast the freezes as part of the administration’s broader crackdown on DEI, and it also comes as Trump and Education Secretary Linda McMahon look to effectively gut the department.

As noted above, this was a 5-4 decision. It is per curiam, so there’s no designated author of the majority decision, but Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court’s three liberal justices in dissent.

The full decision may be viewed here, but here are the key factors in the majority’s ruling:

Continue reading “”

VA Dems Unsuccessful in Gun Control Veto Override

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Democrats in the Virginia House of Delegates unsuccessfully focused on gun control bills vetoed by Gov. Glenn Youngkin out of a reported 157 bills he nixed in what was his final veto session as the Old Dominion chief executive.

The Washington Examiner is reporting that Democrats were unable to override Youngkin’s veto of HB 1607 which would have prohibited the importation, sale, manufacturing, purchasing, or transferring of so-called assault weapons.

Virginia limits its governors to a single term at a time. They may not serve consecutive terms. Republican Lieutenant Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, a Marine Corps veteran, is running hard to succeed him, and she is also considered pro-rights when it comes to the Second Amendment.

According to the Courthouse News, gun control joined voting rights and raising the state’s minimum wage as top-of-the-heap priorities with Democrats, who have a slight majority, as they come back in session. However, the CN acknowledged the slim majority might not play in their favor entirely, and they were right.

Youngkin came into office as a breath of fresh air after Democrats under former Gov. Ralph Northam rammed through several restrictive measures five years ago.

Courthouse News illustrated the divide between Republicans and Democrats in the commonwealth where guns are concerned, by quoting two delegates.

Democrat Dan Helmer, a veteran, complained about Youngkin’s veto of a ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

“These firearms were designed for the battlefield, not for our streets,” Helmer reportedly declared, mouthing an argument that has been made repeatedly by the gun prohibition lobby and its legislative allies.

Republican Nick Freitas, a former Green Beret combat veteran reportedly countered, “The only people in this room terrified of something are apparently our Democrat colleagues, of our own law-abiding citizens. The reason why we have the Second Amendment is not because the founders got back from an especially rigorous hunting trip. The reason why we have the Second Amendment is because our founders recognize that free citizens have to have the means to be able to provide for their own security.”

Voters in Northern Virginia strongly vote Democrat, primarily because many work in government. The south and west parts of the state are traditionally more conservative.