At a press conference Friday morning in Williston, Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis predicted the legislature will pass constitutional carry, but he didn’t say when.
“Well, the one thing I wanted the Legislature to do, and I think we will do it — I can’t tell you exactly when — but I’m pretty confident I will be able to sign a constitutional carry into law in the State of Florida,” DeSantis said.
DeSantis said it is just a matter of time, and he took a swipe at Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried, who oversees Florida’s Concealed Weapon and Firearm Licensing program and is running to replace him as governor.
“We used to be a leader on the Second Amendment — there’s like 25 states that have already done it, and I think if you look now, you have a situation where the official in charge of these permits doesn’t support Second Amendment rights. So why would you want to subcontract your constitutional rights to a public official who rejects the very existence of those rights?” he said. “So, the Legislature will get it done. I can’t tell you if it’ll be next week, six months, but I can tell you that before I am done as governor, we will have a signature on that bill.”
There are several options DeSantis could use to prompt the legislature to consider a constitutional carry bill.
During the special session next month, which will address home insurance issues, he could issue a “communication from the governor” — a formal message to House and Senate leadership, telling them to consider constitutional carry during the special session.
After the special session ends, DeSantis could issue another proclamation calling the legislature back for another special session for the “sole and exclusive purpose” of considering constitutional carry.
Today marks the 46th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, which signified the true end of the Vietnam War. Who could forget that famous picture of people queued up on a Saigon building (mistakenly thought to have been the US Embassy), getting on a UH-1 helicopter leaving Vietnam, as shown in this video:
There were some other great pictures in that video, too. However, the real last helicopter flight out was that of a CH-46 (Callsign “Swift 22”). The video describes the helicopter evacuation operations that were part of Operation Frequent Wind, the largest such operation in history, which commenced on 25 April 1975…………
The non-Communist Vietnamese who escaped the country have long referred to April 1975 as “Black April.” Those who escaped to the US have become some of the most patriotic and anti-Communist of all Americans. Many of them, as well as their progeny, mark Black April on 30 April each year. Here is a typical comment from one person on the 40th anniversary that explains what Black April means:
For Van Truong Le in Boston, this is a painful day, a time he and others who fled Vietnam call “Black April.”
“Because that was when folks from South Vietnam lost our country to the North Communist regime,” he said. “It was the day we lost our country. So we refer to it as Black April 1975. In fact for the last 40 years on April 30, the Vietnamese who have resettled here for the most part commemorate and observe that day as a day to commemorate the loss of Vietnam.”
And that name fits with good reason. Forced reeducation camps and a communization of the economy were in store for those who remained in Vietnam, as part of North Vietnam’s Communist takeover. Here is an excerpt of an account by Quyen Trong, who relates his father’s oral history:
Ukrainian gun-rights advocates are searching for greater support from American gun owners two months into their fight against Russia’s invasion.
Maryan Zablotskyy, a member of Urakaine’s legislature, visited Washington, D.C. on Wednesday to rally support for his country’s fight. He met with gun-rights activists and Capitol Hill insiders, according to The Washington Times. He said he’s hoping to cultivate relationships with people who can help arm his countrymen.
“I want to work more closely with the American government and gun owners so that maybe some of them can share their weapons to Ukrainians, at least to the regions that have been most affected by violence,” Zablotskyy told the paper.
He was also looking for advice on reforming Ukraine’s gun laws to make it easier for civilians to own guns. The country’s legislature passed a law expanding access to firearms and enshrining a right to self-defense in the immediate lead-up to the invasion. As Russian tanks began to roll into the country, the government handed out rifles en mass to any civilians willing to take up arms.
Even Ukrainian lawmakers began taking up arms when the capital city of Kyiv was threatened.
Still, Zablotskyy estimated only about two percent of Ukrainians own guns, and most of those are not rifles useful for resisting an invading army. He hopes to bring more rifles from the United States into the country. He also said the gun laws remain too strict.
“I received a firearm myself in Ukraine, but again, it was stipulated that after ten days or the war ends, I have to surrender it back to the government,” he told The Times.
He said there is now “overwhelming support” for expanding gun rights in the wake of the invasion. Ukrainians have mobilized hundreds of thousands of volunteer fighters to bolster their forces since the war began. Armed civilians have played a significant role in key fights throughout the country, including defending a strategically-important bridge town outside the capital.
Zablotskyy argued the war crimes carried out by Russian soldiers against civilians in Bucha, Ukraine would have been impossible if the population had been armed.
“I’m pretty sure that no massacre would ever have happened if residents of Bucha had firearms,” he told the paper. “They had zero. So, I want to arm those regions that have been most affected who understand the need for arms.”
A repeated ploy of the gun control movement is to loudly proclaim law-abiding Second Amendment supporters are using “scare tactics” while opposing proposed gun control.
U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), the “Honey Pot Congressman,” isn’t new to this charade. His record is one of support for strict gun control. That includes a failed presidential campaign playing second fiddle to Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke to carry the gun control water.
Rep. Swalwell published an op-ed in Newsweek and deployed the ruse.
“For decades, one of the most tried and true scare tactics by the gun lobby is that the government—specifically Democrats—are coming for your guns,” the Congressman wrote. “These misinformation campaigns have been used for years to scare law-abiding Americans into thinking they are going to be put under government surveillance to confiscate their guns.”
Lies About Lies
The thrust of Rep. Swalwell’s anti-Second Amendment screed is that President Joe Biden isn’t interested in confiscating lawfully-owned firearms.
“Let’s be crystal clear—the Biden administration has no secret plan to take away your guns,” he claimed.
He’s right, though – President Biden’s gun control plans aren’t secret. They’re very public and repeated often.
President Biden has on multiple occasions called the lawful firearm industry “the enemy.” A major selling point of his gun control agenda is that he claims he’s, “the only one to have taken on the industry and won.” “I’ve done it before and I’ll do it again,” he’s said.
The president was speaking about his ability to pass a ban on Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs), which he incorrectly and pejoratively terms as “assault weapons.” President Biden, in the 1990s, when he was in the U.S. Senate, voted to ban America’s most popular selling centerfire semiautomatic rifle. He continues to push for a new ban today on the commonly-owned firearm. He claims the ban will drive down crime, but data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says the, “Assault Weapons Ban (AWB)…did not reduce crime rates.” In fact, when the ban expired, violent crime rates continued to drop even as MSR ownership skyrocketed to more than 20 million rifles in circulation.
The president has also repeated his favorite lie that the firearm industry is “the only outfit in the country that is immune,” from liability. This lie has been fact-checked into oblivion, with media saying, “Gun manufacturers can certainly be sued…Biden is wrong to say gun manufacturers are alone.”
The president lies about his wishes to ban certain lawfully-manufactured and legally-purchased firearms, as well as his wishes to shut down an entire industry that supports the ability of Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights. That would certainly qualify as, “taking away guns.”
Twisting Truth
Rep. Swalwell would ban MSRs as well and he’s not alone. He’d go even further, telling Fox News’s Tucker Carlson he’d implement a forced government buyback scheme of the firearms and even, “criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.” Rep. Swalwell went so far as to absurdly suggest if Americans still refused to give up their firearms to a government confiscation scheme, the U.S. government would use nukes against holdouts.
Rep. Swalwell would make confiscation easier, if he had his way, by requiring a national firearm registry. That’s the only way a universal background check could work, a policy that both Rep. Swalwell and President Biden support. Universal background checks (UBCs) are unenforceable without mandatory registration – which is illegal under the 1986 Gun Control Act and 1993 Brady Act.
In his op-ed, Rep. Swalwell says claims about a national gun registry are “conspiracy theories,” and that, “The simple truth is that a gun registry does not exist and is not even being contemplated to illegally track law-abiding individuals who exercise their Second Amendment rights.” He even twists one of my tweets to suggest the firearm industry agrees with his bogus claims.
It’s true – the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) does not currently maintain a searchable national firearm registry. It does, however, keep an Out-of-business Records (OBR) database to trace firearms when they are used in a crime. That collection of records doesn’t allow anyone to run a search for how many and what kind of firearms are owned by any one individual.
About 30 percent of all firearm traces involve searching OBR data. The most recent ATF trace data shows that the average time between when a firearm was originally sold lawfully after a background check and before it was recovered by law enforcement has been close to 10 years as recently as 2017. Searching very old records rarely yields actionable intelligence to law enforcement. That’s why NSSF has long supported requiring ATF to purge records that are older than 20 years to save taxpayer money and to use those dollars to put more agents on the streets to stop crime from occurring in the first place.
Rep. Swalwell knowingly took the tweet out of context in order to lie again about what would be required if a universal background check were to be adopted.
President Biden is clearly doing the bidding of his gun control donors. After repeating his lies about the firearm industry and what his policies would do to law-abiding Americans, there is no doubt that President Biden would indeed go after lawful gun owners and dismantle the industry that provides for the exercise of the Second Amendment. Rep. Swalwell is simply carrying the president’s gun control water because he would do the same exact thing.
How much longer? As long as they can keep pumping him full of whatever anti-dementia drug cocktail that will keep the meat puppet at least able to function at a minimal level. That’s how long
And no, he’s not being too harsh on SloJoe™ who should be a patient in an Alzheimer’s unit.
Back in 2010, P.J. O’Rourke said the Republican mid-term landslide was a restraining order against Obama. Maybe this year’s likely mid-term GOP blowout will be understood as a national intervention, in which the people will tell Democrats that it is time for Biden to be put out to pasture and the Democratic Party sent to rehab.
Chaser: Maybe I am being too harsh on Biden. It’s understandable that Democrats would have trouble pronouncing “kleptocracy.” It could just as easily happen to Elizabeth Warren.
It was not a coincidence that you had Elon Musk buying Twitter and then all of sudden, the Biden team found the need to form a Ministry of Truth run by the DHS — otherwise known as a creepy-sounding “Disinformation Governance Board.”
Now, the first reaction to such an effort by the Biden Administration that most people would have to this is how incredibly Orwellian it is. The second might be that it’s exactly what the First Amendment was designed to protect against. The third might be to take notice this says “governance,” and is being run by the Department of Homeland Security, which usually is pursuing threats and crimes.
So, can fully-declared speech crimes be far away, when you start to have things like this? And finally, this was formed specifically “ahead of the midterms” to deal with “misinformation” peddled to minority communities — which sounds like they’re going to do all they can to try to shut down speech that they think might hurt their chances, just as they did in 2020. And how typical of the Biden Administration to treat minorities as though they can’t make a judgment about the information they receive themselves — this is treating minorities like children to whom the government needs to explain things.
The very people who were upset about President Donald Trump calling media false stories “fake news” are just cool with the government now weighing in and determining what is “true” or not true. These are also the same folks who promoted the Russia collusion hoax for years, as well.
But when asked, White House Press Secretary (soon to be MSDNC propagandist) Jen Psaki acted as though no one could have an issue with their agenda.
PSAKI: "It sounds like the objective of the board is to prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country in a range of communities. I'm not sure who opposes that effort." pic.twitter.com/Z4xOv46RLT
“It sounds like the objective of the board is to prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country in a range of communities,” Psaki said. “I’m not sure who opposes that effort.”
How about any sane person who believes in the Constitution? Every American should oppose this — it violates everything for which we are supposed to stand.
GONE TO DROP TROU AND FOUND A GUN IN A PUBLIC LAVATORY? HERE ARE THE INS AND OUT OF SAFELY ADDRESSING THE SITUATION.
Finding a firearm in a public restroom is unfortunatelynotasuncommonasyoumaythink and with CCW increasing across the board, it’s something you may come across yourself.
The problem starts when someone has to drop trou outside their home. The vast majority of on-person pistols ride in holsters that attach to a pants belt, regardless if it’s designed for inside- or outside-the-waistband. Many of these holsters don’t have positive retention, especially the soft-sided IWB variety, and rely on the pressure between your belt and your body to keep it in place. Sometimes this means a pistol flops when pants come off.
Consequently, some people remove their guns (with or without the holster) while they do their business to prevent it from falling onto the hard tile floor. So they take that pistol and place it on a toilet tank, commercial toilet paper holder, or even hang it on the hook on the back of the stall door. And forget about it. This is especially common with new or infrequent carriers. This article covers the mechanics of what you should do when carrying in public restrooms.
We know that some will be surprised one could be so mindless as to forget a Stacatto in a stall, but people leave their children accidentally in the back of cars all the time.
If you find a gun in a public bathroom, let’s talk about what to do.
ORLANDO, Fla. – A mother said her son had a gun pointed at him while in their own driveway in Orlando early Thursday morning, so he fired back in self-defense.
Orange County deputies said the call first came in at 2 a.m. for a report of a car burglary with shots fired on Martinwood Drive in Pine Hills. Maria Vasquez told FOX 35 it started as two teenagers were trying to steal his car.
“He say, ‘what are you doing? Why are you watching my car?,'” Vasquez said.
According to deputies, the man told them he confronted two people who were burglarizing a car and when they made a threatening move toward him, he fired several shots. Deputies said the two teens were taken to the hospital with non life-threatening injuries.
“Was your son injured?” FOX 35 reporter Valerie Boey asked Vasquez. “No he’s good,” the mother replied.
Vasquez said one of the teenage suspects broke into her car on April 8. Deputies confirmed that break-in. “He go to my car, open and taken my credit card and ID, and my ID for employers and copy,” she said.
She said they stole a copy of the key to her son’s car and came back around 2 a.m. to steal the Toyota Camry. Maria said investigators discovered her son’s car key in the suspect’s pocket. Deputies confirmed that one of the suspect’s in this burglary had evidence from the previous burglary.
“My son is a good person. He works a lot.,” Vasquez said.
According to deputies, the teens are ages 13 and 16. Investigators have to determine whether criminal charges are appropriate.
“He feared for his life. He was defending his space,” resident Judith Stokes, said. Stokes said the Pine Hills neighborhood is usually peaceful.
“To have something like this go on, it is startling,” Stokes said. She believes the teens should have been home, instead of out at 2 a.m.
Vasquez hopes they have a quick recovery.
“Do you hope the teenagers will be ok?” Boey asked, in which Vasquez replied, “Yes, I pray.”
White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Thursday defended a recently-announced Department of Homeland Security effort to combat “disinformation” on issues related to COVID-19 and elections.
Asked by Fox News White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich for more information what DHS’ Disinformation Governance Board would be doing specifically, Psaki said, “I really haven’t dug into this exactly, I mean, we of course support this effort but let me see if I can get more specifics.”
The White House announced its support for an effort from the DHS to crack down on what it considers to be online disinformation.
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified Wednesday that a Disinformation Governance Board had recently been created to combat online disinformation and Politico reported that Nina Jankowicz, who previously served as a disinformation fellow at the Wilson Center, will head the board as executive director.
“We know there has been a range of [disinformation] out there about a range of topics, I mean, including COVID for example, and also elections and eligibility,” Psaki said, adding that she would check for additional information on what the board plans to do.
.@JacquiHeinrich: "There's been some criticism of the person who has been chosen to oversee this…She had previously called the Hunter Biden laptop a Trump campaign product…How can you assuage concerns…wondering if she's going to be able to accurate judge misinformation[?]" pic.twitter.com/2o1UwlEfpH
The Kansas Senate on Monday voted to override Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto on The Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, a bill that would ban biological male athletes from competing in women’s school sports across the state.
Also known as SB 160, the legislation “requires interscholastic, intercollegiate, intramural, or club athletic teams or sports that are sponsored by public educational institutions” to ban male students from joining teams or sports “designated for females.”
It does not ban female athletes or girls from participating in men’s or boys’ sports.
However, the Senate voted 28–10 on Monday to override the governor’s veto, and it now heads to the House for lawmakers to vote to sustain or override the veto.
ST. JOSEPH COUNTY, Ind. — A man who pointed a gun at a woman after asking her for money, fled after she pulled out a gun of her own, according to court records. He is now facing one count of intimidation.
On April 25, South Bend Police responded to 27th Street and Mishawaka Avenue for reports of a man pointing a handgun at a woman.
The victim told police a man, later identified as Garland Adams, walked up to her and asked for money. When she didn’t give him money, he pulled out a gun and pointed it at her face, according to the probable cause affidavit.
The woman then backed up and pulled out a pink handgun of her own, reports said.
The man then fled on his bike.
Two people at a gas station nearby witnessed the incident.
Officers searched for the suspect and located Adams at 36th Street and Mishawaka. Police said he had a black gun in his right hand, reports said.
When police knocked the gun to the ground, it broke into three pieces, police said.
The gun was a BB gun with the orange tip removed to make it look like a real gun, reports said.
Adams was taken to the gas station where the witnesses identified Garland as the man who pointed the gun at the victim, according to the probable cause affidavit.
Officers also obtained footage from the gas station that showed the incident.
The video showed Garland approach the victim as she backed away. Garland advanced towards the victim, pointing the gun at her, as she continued to try to back away, reports said.
The victim ran out of view and took up a firing position with her pistol behind some trash cans, the video showed.
The suspect pointed his weapon in her direction before getting on his bike and fleeing the area.
Adams was taken into custody on one count of intimidation. He was charged on April 27.
The victim was also arrested for carrying a handgun without a license, but was released with no charges filed.
The author barely gives any notice about ‘internal’ dissent, but that’s almost certainly a big part of this, as there’s too much going on in too many different places, that are far from the border, and covert infiltration in non-permissive areas is extremely difficult to pull off.
BLUF:
….it’s the nature of wars that were meant to be limited to spin out of control.
“What the hell is going on in Russia?” is the kind of headline you write when there’s so much weird stuff going on that it’s impossible to summarize it cleverly.
Maybe you’ll find this catchier: There’s a lot of stuff getting blown up in Russia, and it might not just be the Ukrainians blowing it up.
The weirdness got going in a normal way, with reports earlier this week of Ukraine’s “embrace of the British special forces model” to strike targets inside Russia that the regular Army (or even Ukraine’s inadequate Air Force) could never reach.
The Washington Examiner’s Tom Rogan reported that a major oil depot was hit on Monday in Bryansk, more than 60 miles inside Russia’s border with Ukraine. That’s outside the range of most of Ukraine’s drones.
While interesting, it isn’t exactly a “what the hell?” moment. British troops have been training Ukraine’s special operators since Russia annexed Ukraine and armed insurgents in Ukraine’s Donbas region back in 2014.
Two explosions were reported in Voronezh, nearly 200 miles from Ukraine, and a Ukrainian drone was reportedly shot down over Kursk, about 70 miles from the border.
The attacks in Kursk and Voronezh, where air-defense systems were reportedly activated, raised the specter of a wider war, as they were farther inside Russia than previous targets.
If you had asked me last week if Ukraine could hit a target 200 miles inside Russia, I’d have been doubtful.
Actually, it’s still a bit hard to believe.
But maybe you’ll join me in asking “What the hell is going on in Russia?” after these next few items.
Drones for Ukraine has a unique fundraising tool: Donate $1,000 or more to their effort to procure modern drones to defend against the Russian invasion, get a genuine piece of aircraft skin from a downed Russian jet fighter.
“Have you always wanted a Su-34 ‘Fullback’ strike fighter?” the Twitter pitch goes. “But $50M is a little bit pricey?”
As a matter of fact, $50 million is a little pricey. I’ve got two boys, and you should see our monthly food bill.
But: “Just donate $1000+ to support Ukrainian army and we’ll send you this tag recycled from a downed Russian plane (it’s literally a piece of it with little engraving).”
(Image courtesy of Drones for Ukraine.)
“Made in Russia, Recycled in Ukraine” is a pretty gutsy tagline, too.
“Your donations will help us supply the defenders in Ukraine with modern drones and equipment to counter the invasion,” according to the website. So your donation in exchange for a piece of a shot-down Russian jet might just help Ukraine shoot down another one.
A dozen of us were seated on either side of the long dining table. Present were writers gathered from across the nation and around the world. Beside me was a lady from Nigeria. Facing me was a Romanian. The woman next to her had flown in from Sydney, Australia. This was a celebratory supper after a long day of book signings at the Los Angeles Times Book Festival — a major literary event.
The conversation among this group of lively intellects was a sparkling delight — light-hearted and witty. Only for a brief while did it turn to the fashionable liberal topic of the moment: the benefits of censoring free speech. I said nothing. Why spoil the celebration?
It is odd that the notion that speech must be censored is the current fashion of people who call themselves liberal. Liberalism is supposed to be the philosophy of individual freedom and free speech. Well, language evolves, and true liberals are much more likely to be found in the ranks of conservatives than those left of center.
There really are true liberals on the left. The people seated around me certainly were. Unfortunately, they live in an almost impenetrable fortress of specious certainty. Conservatives swim in a sea of progressivism, so they are well aware of the thinking of the left. The converse is not the case. In my experience, people left of center have a fantastically distorted concept of conservative ideas. I suppose this is because they mostly listen to one another, to the progressive media, and to their thought masters, not to real conservatives. Perhaps, too, they fear they might like conservative ideas and so become outcasts.
The current leading thought master is Barack Obama.Despite his pretensions of being a liberal, he is not — he is something dangerously different. “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” he so famously said in the last days of his presidential campaign. You do not fundamentally transform something you love; you fundamentally change what you despise.
Obama later realized that he had given the game away. In a subsequent interview with Bill O’Reilly, he said, “I don’t think we have to fundamentally transform the nation.” But then he immediately changed the subject. Now, once again, he is at it.
First Look: Walther PDP F Series
Created with over a century of engineering & precision to specifically work with a woman’s hand.
New from Walther is the PDP F-Series of pistols, designed for female shooters who want the versatility, dependability and effectiveness of the Walther PDP, but in a package specifically designed around their unique needs.
The new F-Series is built to meet the demands of female shooters. Walther has completely re-engineered the ergonomics of the grip to be designed for the exact biomechanics of women’s hands. The new, patented operating system of the PDP F Series reduces the amount of force needed to operate the slide. In addition to this, the new PDP F Series has a reduced grip circumference and trigger reach. F Series pistols retain other features from the PDP lineup including compatibility with holsters for both the full and compact size PDP, as well has compact PDP magazine compatibility and are red-dot ready, right out of the box. When paired with the other performance features of the original PDP, it means the F-Series pistol is the great choice for all women who are interested in the shooting sports.
Walther Shooting team member, Olympian and Firearms Instructor Gabby Franco had this to say about it, “The PDP F-series is the result of a revolutionary approach to creating a pistol with female shooters in mind. Walther Arms took the difficult task of developing a mid-sized frame handgun that offers high ammo capacity with a smaller grip, shorter trigger, and excellent ergonomics like no other. The F-series is the best tool in the market for self-defense, law enforcement, target shooting, and competitive shooting. It makes me proud to be part of a project to bring a pistol that contributes to many women’s quests to become better shooters.”
PDP F Series Specifications
Caliber: 9mm
Barrel Length: 3.5 or 4 inches
Slide Length: 6.5 inches
Trigger Pull: 5 pounds
Magazine Capacity: 15 + 1 rounds
Magazines Included: 2
Sights: White Dot Adjustable
MSRP for either the 3.5 or 4 inch barrel version of the PDP F Series is $699, and more information on these pistols and other products from Walther can be found at waltherarms.com.
Perhaps because these ‘intellectuals’ all remind us so much of SloJoe™ and his crap-for-brains
A study identifying anti-intellectualism as a growing part of rural identities has sparked a discussion about the best ways of encouraging rural communities to engage with scientific expertise.
The study, which originally appeared in the January 2022 issue of Political Behavior, found that people with a rural social identification are more likely to view experts and intellectuals as outsiders, according to its author, Kristin Lunz Trujillo, a post-doctoral candidate at the Covid States Project of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and Northeastern University.
Whenever the VP + officers of executive departments transmit to congress their declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers + duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President. Amend. 25
I don’t mean to be the wet blanket here. We should celebrate liberals freaking out over Elon Musk’s $44 billion Twitter purchase. We should be celebrating the end of censorship and a new era of free speech on the platform. It’s a huge win for conservatives, but the war is far from being over. As with these victories, we face another, larger battle on the horizon. The enemy is not new; it’s the government again. Yet, this time they’re taking the Twitter ethos regarding “disinformation” national.
Rebecca touched upon this last night, but the warning flares must be fired again. Load the magazines, clean the guns, and sharpen the bayonets because Goliath is coming. The Department of Homeland Security is creating a “Disinformation Governance Board.” I’m sure this will be a smooth operation, right? Let’s be frank about this because you all know what’s going on here. This Thought Police department is being created to help Democrats ahead of the 2022 midterms. It’s a Democratic attack machine within the DHS funded by our tax dollars. Like the IRS, FBI, and DOJ before them, another government institution has been weaponized by the Left to attack people they don’t like (via Fox News):
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified Wednesday that the Department of Homeland Security is creating a “Disinformation Governance Board” to combat misinformation ahead of the 2022 midterms.
Mayorkas appeared before the House Appropriations Subcommittee to discuss the fiscal 2023 budget for the Department of Homeland Security.[…]
Mayorkas said a “Disinformation Governance Board” had recently been created and will be led by Undersecretary for Policy Rob Silvers co-chair with principal deputy general counsel Jennifer Gaskill.[…]
Hours later, Politico reported that Nina Jankowicz, who previously served as a disinformation fellow at the Wilson Center, will head the board as executive director.
Jankowicz was part of a band called the Moaning Myrtles. She also said armed Trump supporters would show up at the polls to intimidate voters. And she’s a Russian collusion peddler. That alone is the disqualifying factor.
Donald Trump Jr. was the pro-gun voice in his father’s White House. While the president often spoke pro-gun words, there were many who said it was his son who gave them to him.
I’m glad there was someone there who could give the elder Trump some guidance on that sort of thing.
Now, though, it seems the younger Trump has decided to take his pro-gun work to a different level.
Donald Trump Jr. is launching a new gun rights group that he says will be a vehicle for fighting against Democratic gun control efforts.
Fox News Digital has learned that Trump Jr. will be launching the Second Amendment Task Force and will serve as the chairman of the group as it works to protect Americans’ right to bear arms.
“The Second Amendment is the whole ballgame; it’s the freedom that protects all of our other freedoms. Unfortunately the Biden Administration and Democrats in Congress are hellbent on eroding our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, whether it’s nominating radical gun-grabbers to senior positions in the executive branch or pushing anti-gun legislation,” Trump Jr. told Fox News Digital. “The Second Amendment Task Force is entirely devoted to ensuring the Left is never successful in disarming American citizens.”
The Second Amendment Task Force is the first advocacy group that Trump has launched and been directly involved with. The group plans to make a push in the upcoming midterm elections this year, especially in the voter registration sphere.
OK. Um…why a new group?
Don’t get me wrong, I have no issue with the mission in and of itself. Voter registration isn’t a bad thing, though I suspect gun owners are far more likely to be registered to vote than the general public.
No, my question is more about why form a completely different gun rights organization when there are already a number in existence. If you’re not a fan of the NRA, then there are Gun Owners of America, Firearm Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, and a number of others.
I can’t imagine many who wouldn’t want Donald Trump Jr. on their board of directors and would be more than willing to listen to him regarding areas he believes the Second Amendment community is underserving.
So, again, why?
My concern is that there’s only so much support for any cause. A new organization will dilute the pool and potentially provide fewer resources for everyone. If Trump thinks someone isn’t doing what they should and he wants to push them out of the picture, then so be it. That’s the beauty of the free market and all that.
Yet the problem is that we don’t know that. We don’t know why he’s forming a gun-rights group right now, and I’m curious as to the answer.
Will I lose sleep over it? Probably not. However, I’ll also be paying attention to what they do going forward to see just how they’re fitting into the Second Amendment ecosystem. Who knows, maybe he’ll attract new voices to Second Amendment activism and increase the pool of resources for everyone. If so, that’ll be a huge win.
It should be interesting to see how everything unfolds.
As gun-controllers exploit a California mass shooting, even mainstream media are expressing skepticism.
In the wake of the recent shootout in Sacramento — now thought to be a gang battle involving at least five shooters — gun-control zealots are determined to take away the people’s rights and give them more of what doesn’t work.
California has more gun laws than any other, yet state lawmakers are still exploring new ways to disarm peaceable residents and leave them at the mercy of criminals. Meanwhile, President Biden has already taken advantage of the tragedy, calling on Congress to pass the same laws that didn’t stop the carnage in California.
Surprisingly, even the mainstream press, which tends to be favorable toward gun control, has shown skepticism.
It was reported on April 19 that “several bills” to further restrict guns in California have “gained momentum from recent mass shootings,” especially the April 3 Sacramento massacre. Predictably, many of these bills have no connection to that incident. Instead, they’re items from the wish list of anti-gun groups: enabling lawsuits against gun manufacturers, further burdening lawful firearm dealers, restricting gun marketing, and “targeting ghost guns.” Less predictably, NPR, notorious for left-wing anti-gun bias, would question the value of passing more gun-control laws in California.
Following the Sacramento massacre, NPR reported on “at least 24 more bills” to restrict guns in California. The piece had a borderline-snarky headline that a gun-rights advocate could have written: “After the Sacramento shooting, the state with the most gun laws may soon get more.” In many ways, the piece itself was typical NPR. But it also contained flashes of realism.
“Even when states make it harder to get guns, gun violence still occurs all too often,” reporter Laurel Wamsley noted. “In a state that already has more gun restrictions than anywhere else in the U.S., how much further can the law go?” As Wamsley pointed out, the violence-plagued state already gets Giffords’s highest rating for gun control.
NPR wasn’t alone in raising questions. Amazingly, the Trace — an outlet dedicated to gun-control advocacy — seemed skeptical about the California push. Its April 4 Daily Bulletin was headlined by the Sacramento shooting. It concluded, as the bulletin often does, with a statistic: “107 — the number of gun control laws on the books in California, more than any other state.” The same day, the Trace reported that the Sacramento shooting “likely involved” an already-illegal gun modification.
An even clearer note of skepticism came from Politico, reporting on President Biden’s reaction to the Sacramento shootout.
In his gun-grabbing response — basically a rehash of old material — Biden called on Congress to “ban ghost guns,” “require background checks for all gun sales,” “ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,” and “repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability.”
