Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Eric Holder. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Eric Holder. Sort by date Show all posts

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Urgent Action Alert on Holder Contempt Vote

I don't normally do this, but I'm tired.  And this needs to get out. So I'm just pasting the whole thing:
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO VOTE ON ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER CONTEMPT CHARGE Your urgent action is needed on Holder contempt vote to be held Thursday, June 28th. Anti-gun rights Attorney General Eric Holder is facing a Contempt of Congress charge as a result of his refusing to comply with the subpoena to turn over all documents relating to the botched "Fast and Furious" gun running sting that were demanded by Rep. Darrell Issa's Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Congress has repetitively asked for accountability in relation to the death of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry, the firearms recovered at the scene of his murder and over 2000 guns that are still missing. REMEMBER THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S URGENT CALL FOR THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE EXPIRED "ASSAULT WEAPONS" BAN. REMEMBER THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S FALSE CLAIM OF 90,000 GUNS RECOVERED IN MEXICO BEING FROM THE U.S. The Obama Administration and Eric Holder's Justice Department have been adamant in communications with anti-gun groups that their gun control agenda would be advanced "Under the radar." In the moments before Darrell Issa's committee were to vote on Attorney General Eric Holder's contempt, the Obama White House issued a proclamation of "Executive Privilege." It is important to note that Attorney General Holder and the Obama Administration denied any knowledge of "Fast and Furious" until new evidence surfaced. WHAT YOU MUST DO AS A LAW ABIDING GUN OWNER TODAY.CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN TODAY AND POLITELY INFORM THEM TO HOLD ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER IN CONTEMPT. USE THE LINK BELOW TO FIND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE NUMBER. http://www.house.gov/representatives/ Help the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms send a message that our rights as citizens cannot be manipulated by failed and legally questionable programs such as "Fast and Furious." 
 Do this. And spread the word.

Sunday, February 01, 2009

The Holder Nomination

by Russ Howard

Word is (and word fits with what's happening), that the NRA has unofficially informed Senators that confirmation of extremely anti-gun Eric Holder as attorney general will not be held against them. That's why there has been almost no resistance and Holder sailed through committee with only two "No"s. In fact, more "A rated" Senators voted for Holder in committee than F-rated Senators, once again revealing the perennial fraud of NRA's black box system of unearned "A" grades for gun grabbers and squishes, top-secret candidate questionnaires, and endorsements of anti-gun candidates over viable pro-gun opponents. Had all the "pro-gun" senators in committee stuck together and opposed Holder, he would've lost the vote and the momentum and it would've been a new ball game. They didn't because it was not requested.

This is a battle that will be lost because one side didn't fight. Perhaps a Holder confirmation is not the worst outcome gun owners face with the new "change" government. But that doesn't seem like a good reason not to resist and at least make the enemy pay for the turf. The games being played here are the kind that have cost gun owners dearly in gun control legislation in past decades. If the gun rights community continues to tolerate them, it may lead to far worse losses in the future than this nomination battle.

See articles by David Codrea of the War On Guns and Examiner.com, Kevin Starrett of Oregon Firearms Federation, Jeff Knox of the Firearms Coalition, etc. Links here and below.
www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m1d28-Holder-approved-by-Senate-Judiciary-Committee
http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/01.29.09%20alert.html
www.firearmscoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=338&Itemid=1


There was little resistance mainly because the NRA did not demand resistance and let the senate and their own members know that blocking Holder is important. "Pro-gun" senators still have the numbers to block him by filibuster -- if they actually tried, if senators knew that voting for cloture would be punished in grading and support. The enemy must bring 60 hard votes to kill a filibuster, even if only one senator shows up to support it. But the NRA will let Holder go to the floor, where he will be confirmed by majority.

Also see:
www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m1d30-A-certain-outcome-for-Holder
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/28/ldt.01.html

'If enlisting beltway insiders who approved pardons for payoffs is "change", it's change we can do without.'
- Sample letter from Oregon Firearms Federation
http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/01.29.09%20alert.html
OFF Alert] Eric Holder. Janet Reno Reborn.
http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/01.24.09%20alert.html

www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/02/14/sullivan_atf_confirmation_blocked/
"Under Senate rules, a single senator can put a hold on legislative action for months."
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2009/01/sometimes-saying-no.html
www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m1d6-How-to-hold-Holder-without-using-guns
www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m1d8-Another-reason-to-hold-Holder
www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m1d25-Holder-clutches-at-gun-rights
www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m1d24-A-progun-pick


I suppose blocking Holder is not as important as blocking an assault weapon bill. Perhaps that explains why even GOA's alert yesterday doesn't mention the word filibuster http://gunowners.org/a012909.htm , though it says "if confirmed, [Holder] will be in a position where he will be able to use the force of government to discourage or outlaw gun ownership in America." If Holder is that dangerous, isn't it worth pushing for filibuster, where he could be stopped with a minority? I don't know.

The public defection of two "pro-gun" A rated Quislings and a near unanimous committee vote occurred in the absence of pressure, encouraged by absence of pressure. To assert that what happened is a reasonable indication of what the numbers would've been had there been a clear commitment to fight with our strongest tools, seems like self-fulfilling prophesy.

If there really was no chance of keeping the enemy from getting 60 votes and we're not demanding a filibuster, then why write letters to try to keep them from getting 51 votes on the floor?

My instinct is Americans should make the enemies of constitutional liberty pay dearly for every inch of turf. Since when is it great strategy to roll over and not even try unless we're guaranteed to win, or because we're short a couple votes before serious pressure is applied? The battle itself is a vehicle to make our case against the other side and galvanize resistance. For several years running, immigration sanity groups have fought comprehensive immigration "reform" (amnesty, "guest" workers who never leave, etc.). They demanded filibusters and fought cloture votes even when it didn't look like they would win. The battle helped grow and focus the resistance. In at least one case they managed to beat "reform" after losing on cloture, because so much heat was the heat was growing before, during and after the filibuster.

In any case, consider this:

"…The single strongest argument against new federal gun bans is history: Democrats controlled Congress from 1948 to1994 when Clinton forced a passle of very reluctant Democratic members of Congress to vote for his "assault weapon" ban. In the ensuing election those reluctant supporters were defeated and the Republicans captured Congress for the first time in 50 years. Clinton attributed all this to his disastrous AW bill.

The Republicans are praying for the Democrats to enact a new AW ban."

-Howard Nemerov; forwarded cover note to his 1-30-09 examiner.com article "400 Years of Gun Control ... Part 1"
www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-RIghts-Examiner
(Article, link and cover note forwarded by Dan Gifford)

"The Republicans are praying for the Democrats to enact a new AW ban." If NRA members don't force the NRA to start holding senators accountable with honest grading and smart grade-weighting, then we are much more likely to get another AW ban and other new controls. Even though "pro-gun" senators have the power to block and filibuster a new gun control bill, enough of the phonies will flip to kill the filibuster, then the pro-gun side will cast a phony prearranged losing vote against the bill on the floor. They will help it pass while appearing to oppose it, and use the new law to force gun owners to increase donations and support to the very politicians who intentionally let it happen. The NRA will help them do it by covering it up with dishonest grades and endorsements. The NRA will also use it to get more money. It's like "protection".

The gun rights community needs a tough, honest, smart, weighted grading system that counts filibuster and similar maneuvers as more than one vote and withholds points for phony pre-arranged "pro-gun" floor votes.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Sometimes, Saying "No" isn't Enough

Why I will vote 'no' on Holder
Good for you, Senator Barrasso.

But here's the thing. That in and of itself won't cut it.

We need for you to go the next step and put a hold on the confirmation process. Filibuster. Obstruct. Delay. Loudly call on each senator who received an NRA endorsement--including democrats--to join you.

Lord knows Fairfax won't.

That's really the only way Holder's going to be stopped, and you know it.

So anything short of doing what it actually takes becomes pretty meaningless. A cynical person might even deem it risk-free and opportunistic.

You've assumed point on this, which makes you "It."

Please show real leadership.

Hold Holder.

I ask WarOnGuns regulars to join me.

Contact Senator Barrasso with the simple message "Hold Holder."

And get this post to every Wyoming gun owner you know, and ask them to contact him, so that Barrasso knows his constituents expect him to lead on this.

Do it right now.

More on Eric Holder from Gun Rights Examiner

Holder clutches at gun rights

Holder delayed

Holder's first hurdle

A 'sideshow issue'

GOA enters Holder fray

Lowering the Barr

Holder first squall in an approaching storm

Another reason to hold Holder

How you can help hold Holder

How to hold Holder without 'using guns'

Holder: 'To-be' or not to be


[Via Zachary G]

[Click to enlarge]


Oh--and take a minute to comment on Trib.com to encourage readers there to join in.

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

GOA Enters Holder Fray

Gun Owners of America has issued an alert to its members to oppose confirmation of Eric Holder as attorney general. [More]
Go read about it at Gun Rights Examiner. And then take the requested action.

Tell a friend?

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

This is the Guy

Pending passage through the vetting process, our next Attorney General will be Eric Holder.

Armed and Safe tells us of a nominee who wants to impose the centerpiece of the McCain small arms control agenda on us, closing the dreaded "gun show loophole," that is, ending all private off-the-books sales.

It gets worse.

For instance, he's also a big fan of waiting periods, and pre-crime, and the Brady Act, and one-gun-a-month, increasing the disarmament enforcement bureaucracy, mandating lock-up-your-safety, and disarming the age demographic that put his prospective boss over the top.

Holder statement-May 1999
When the AMA analyzed the success of Virginia's one-gun-a-month law, it found that the number of guns connected to crime traveling Northeast from Virginia fell 20%.

Holder statement-June 1999
Even worse -- for the events that it does cover, the bill weakens the current law by cutting down the amount of time law enforcement has to complete pre-sale background checks, from 3 working days to 72 hours.

Holder briefing-October 1999
[W]e need Congress to pass the common- sense gun safety legislation that is in the Senate and that has been passed in the Senate by a bipartisan vote. We need to extend the Brady law protection to gun shows and flea markets and deny guns to those who committed violent offenses as juveniles, require child- safety locks on handguns and give law enforcement the tools that it needs to further reduce gun crime. We also need to have the COPS Program fully funded.

Statement as Deputy AG
Of course, our strategy does not rely merely on punishing offenders after crimes have been committed. We are also working to implement measures to prevent gun crimes before they occur.

Gun control debate
ERIC HOLDER: A mandatory 72-hour waiting period for all happen-gun purchases will help stop heat-of-the moment killings and a proposed increase in the minimum age for handgun possession from 18 to 21 will get hand guns out of the hands of the most crime-prone age group.
This is the guy.

[Via Jay Keller, Russ S]

Sunday, February 01, 2009

Anti-Gun Deception On The Senate Floor

Did we mention that our opponents are deliberately deceptive?

What--you mean they'll still give an A-rating to someone who votes for Eric Holder?

I want you to take a few minutes and read what NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox has to say about Holder, naturally under the "Vote Freedom First" header. Among other things:
...Holder's history of aggressive anti-gun activism is even worse than Emanuel's record of media-focused PR stunts.

Holder has always been among the first in front of the cameras to exploit tragedy for political gain. From Columbine to the September 11 attacks, there was no event in which Holder couldn't find some inspiration for gun bans, gun registration, gun rationing and more. Just weeks after terrorists used box cutters to turn airplanes into guided missiles, Holder wrote in the Washington Post, "One measure that is an essential part of any plan is the need to tighten our nation's gun laws, which allow the easy and legal sale of firearms to terrorists and criminals."

Holder claimed, mistakenly, "No court has ever said that the Second Amendment actually says that. I think, if you look at it, it talks about bearing guns in a well-regulated militia. And I don't think anywhere it talks about an individual." Holder most recently signed a brief...in the Heller case that "The Second Amendment does not protect firearm possession or use that is unrelated to participation in a well-regulated militia."
But if senators don't "Vote Freedom First," well, anybody who has a problem with that just doesn't understand how politics works.

And forget talking filibuster. With the betrayal by all those A-rated republicans on the Judiciary Committee, we're told we just don't have the numbers. And why did they feel comfortable with betrayal again? Where was the NRA-ILA Alert leading a concerted effort to oppose Holder from Day One, to write, call and email senators, to publicly, loudly and repeatedly make it known that "Vote Tyranny First" would not be cost-free?

Right. After what Cox just told us, we're supposed to turn around and accept that this is just not important enough to expend political capital on? Besides, activist gun owners would be so worn out from making a few phone calls and sending a few letters that they'd just be totally spent when AWB2 comes around. What, you think we can walk now and chew gun six months later?

Which I guess means a vote for cloture if someone does strap 'em on to filibuster won't be held against them, either. Or against any of those A-rated and endorsed "pro-gun" democrats:
If the assumption is "all the current Democratic senators," what can we expect from our new shining "pro-gun Democrat" star? Or we might ask where our "true champion of Second Amendment freedoms" Max Baucus stands...or Tim Johnson...or...
There is one point where I agree with the Lairds of Fairfax. There is anti-gun deception on the Senate floor. And it is deliberate.

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Put a Hold on Holder

From Mike Vanderboegh:
Of course this comes as no surprise to anyone, but of all the people BHO seeks to surround himself with in DC, Eric Holder as the nominee for Attorney General has to be the most offensive stench in the nostrils of free men and women.
From Jeff Knox:
Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s nominee for Attorney General, is a totally unacceptable choice and needs to be strongly opposed by the Second Amendment community and all lovers of liberty.
Write your senator on this and demand to know where they stand. If they blow you off with boilerplate weasel words, write them again, more strongly.

I don't care if your senator is Dianne Feinstein or Hillary Clinton. Don't use that as an excuse to do nothing. Write them anyway and get your friends to do it and make it a roar that will at least give them pause.

Here's a perfect opportunity to prove the value of the pragmatic position. Denying obama a key nominee right out of the starting gate is important tactically, and important psychologically -- both to encourage our side and cause uncertainty for theirs. What will it tell us if it's blown, as so much has been, due to apathy?

I understand a key guy to work on is George Voinovich. He's been no friend, so it's time to remind this guy what happened to Mike DeWine.

I also see our old friend Richard Lugar is another holdback.

No excuses. Just take a few minutes and do this.

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Guest Editorial: HR 45, the Assault Weapons Ban, and the Hegelian Dialectic

by Dominus Defensor

The Obama administration wants to craft a new assault weapon ban and make it permanent, and it wants to end the private sale of all firearms, among other things. This announcement from the potential attorney general is one of the most important events for the gun rights community in a long time. This is the first public expression of Obama's plans by an identifiable individual within the Obama administration.

At the 1-16-2009 Senate Judiciary Hearings Eric Holder said the following: "I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent would be something that would be permitted under Heller, and I also think [it] would be good...."

The announcement by Holder is likely the real plan of the administration. The previously announced HR45 is likely a diversion as part of the implementation and execution of the Hegelian Dialectic. HR45, as recently discussed at WOG and at examiner.com outlines the draconian plans to require licenses to own firearms, the passing of a written exam, government access to your private medical records, and a central registry of all gun owners, etc. All of this just for the exercise of a fundamental human right.

HR45 is probably not their real agenda for the moment (not that they would be upset if they did achieve it). It was announced with perfect timing right before the Holder confirmation hearings. The drafting and announcement of HR45 was likely designed to achieve the following goals:

1. Execution of the Hegelian Dialectic. They intentionally create a sense of panic with the proposed draconian legislation (HR45) that the boot is about to stomp our heads. Then, when they subsequently release their slightly less draconian plans at the confirmation hearings for Holder (assault weapon ban, end all private transfers of guns, etc.), we breathe a sigh of relief that things are not as bad as we thought and voluntarily accept lesser infringements. (NOTE: it could be argued that the real plan is just the opposite in that HR45 is the goal and not another assault weapon ban. Either way, their ultimate goal is to deny us our fundamental human right to keep and bear arms, and the main thing for us is to understand the tactics behind their actions.)

We must counter this by knowing the nature and origin of our rights and refusing to surrender them in the most loud and raucous way possible. Never voluntarily surrender any rights. We must reinforce the idea that attempting to take these rights will come at a great cost for the enemy because we will never voluntarily submit to their abuses or their tricks.

Summary of the Hegelian Dialectic:

This has been explained before, but here is another summary.

The basic premise of the Hegelian Dialectic is to incrementally move in the desired direction to the detriment of a group of people with the voluntary consent of the aggrieved people. This is done through fear and release. First, a terrifying plan is leaked out that would mean catastrophe or a gross violation of the target people's rights. Then, a less extreme plan is proposed as a compromise to the more extreme plan. This makes the target feel relieved that things will not be as bad as originally thought, creating a sense of release, and the target voluntarily chooses to submit to the less extreme plan under the false hope that the bad guys will be satiated and under the false belief that a crisis has been averted by choosing the lesser of two evils. The bad guys are NEVER satiated, and they will be back for more in the future. In addition, choosing the lesser of two evils as dictated by the bad guys is never the solution. We must dictate our own solutions that confront evil.

2. Divert attention from the Holder hearings so gun owners and freedom lovers will not pay attention to the planned infringements that are being publicly announced during the hearings. They are not hiding their plans from us. However, they are using simple tricks to make us look the other direction. Everything we need to know about their plans is right in front of our faces. They are simply creating the psychological opportunity for us to ignore reality.

We must counter this by facing reality, accepting what has been exposed right before our eyes, and getting the issues to the forefront. Also, we must publicly expose their actions and their plans in the most loud and raucous way possible. This does not mean we should ignore HR45. In fact, the recent efforts by David and and gun rights activists at examiner.com were very impressive, and they should serve as a model for how to agitate against Obama's plans as announced by Holder. We must understand their tactics and keep them under steady pressure on all fronts.

Here are the recent efforts at examiner.com:
-"Qualifying Firearms"
-"Kill (the) Bill"

3. Condition the target (us) to eventually accept the more draconian plan in the future and test the target for compliance and submissiveness. By constantly barraging the target with threatened attacks and incremental infringements, the hope is that the target will eventually grow weary of threats to the peace and will decide that the constant threats of warfare are not worth the price. They also want to use numerous small attacks to make it seem like they have an impossibly large number of supporters. The enemy believes that if they keep this up long enough, one of their attacks will eventually reveal us as totally submissive and compliant to their plans. They also hope that we will feel overwhelmed and give up. The war will be over at that point, and they are gradually trying to move us in that direction.

We must counter this by refusing to submit in a loud and raucous manner at every opportunity. We must push back at every attack point because we will find that their forces are spread very thin and offer very little in the form of dedicated, deep resistance at any point. This is obvious whenever we take an aggressive stand against them - all opposition melts away, and we are left standing alone and victorious. The perfect examples are the recent battles over at examiner.com on HR45. In every case, the enemy threw in the towel in the presence of our onslaught and disappeared into the night. We must make it clear that we will never grow weary of the fight, and we must be prepared to back up our words with the relevant actions.

4. Provide plausible deniability for the Obama administration in that they did not publicly propose the more draconian HR45. Obama and his administration can point the finger at "extremists" outside of their administration who drafted HR45. Obama can then play the role of a great compromiser (and a moderate, to boot) by proposing a less extreme agenda than what is found in HR45. The "less extreme" agenda will actually be filled with extremist plans (e.g.; permanent assault weapon, end of private transfer of firearms, etc.), but these plans will seem tame compared to what is in HR45.

We must counter this by exposing the fraud of their behavior, and we must never let the Obama administration successfully play the moderate/compromiser card. We must "name names", and never let anyone off the hook for their actions.

Conclusion

The tactics of the enemy reveal that he is weak. If he were strong, he would launch a direct attack against us and crush us with a single blow. He is not strong enough to beat us with a single blow, nor does he have the broad public support that the media deceptively portrays. The other side of this coin is that we are strong. The only way the enemy can beat us is if we voluntarily submit to his simple tricks. His tricks have now been revealed to everyone. Now, we must use our knowledge and continue to fight back. The war is clearly on, and so are we.

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

"The Most Prudent and Effective Strategy"

Forwarded to me:
----- Original Message -----
From: "ILA-Contact"
To: <________>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 10:58 AM
Subject: Holder


Dear Mr. _________,

We are vehemently opposed to Holder's nomination and are working with a number of U.S. Senators to try and prevent his appointment. Eric Holder is a radical enemy of the Second Amendment, and we will do what we can to keep him out of office.

Using our influence with the U.S. Senators is the most prudent and effective strategy we can use to stop him. He is not currently under indictment for any crime, so there is nothing legally prohibiting from taking office except the need for U.S. Senate approval. If there were, I can assure you that we use all of our power and influence to use that against him.

I can assure you that we've made it perfectly clear to the Senate that Holder is our enemy, and that voting in favor of his appointment will have serious consequences in future relations with the NRA. I understand that there are a number of rumors on the internet criticizing the NRA, but please understand that we cannot release any more information beyond what I've written here. We are doing everything we can.

Please review this recent letter Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox sent to Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator Arlen Specter:

http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/HolderLetter010909.pdf

Cordially,

Angus McClellan
NRA-ILA Grassroots
Yeah, we saw that.

Ar least they're not ending their correspondences with "rest assured" any more.

I'd sure like to see one of those internet rumors pointed out to me. Most of what I've seen have been pretty dead on, albeit they missed the point about Holder not being a strong enough champion for federal gun control edicts.

I guess some will argue this "strategy" is "prudent." Any bets on how "effective" it will be?

Wednesday, January 07, 2009

Congress' Plan Would Let AG 'Ban Guns at Will'

A perfect storm is developing for Second Amendment opponents that could allow President-elect Barack Obama's choice for attorney general – Eric Holder – to "ban guns at will" despite the 2008 affirmation from the U.S. Supreme Court that U.S. citizens have a right to bear arms. [More]
WorldNetDaily's Bob Unruh sheds more light on why it's important to block Eric Holder, and gives a nod to one of my Gun Rights Examiner columns.

The article he cites by Alan Korwin is posted here.

[Via MP]

Friday, June 15, 2012

Armed American Radio to Talk Vanderboegh Bombshells

Here's the latest press release from Armed American Radio, copied and pasted in its entirety:
For Immediate Release

Armed American Radio to report during Sunday 6-17-2012 broadcast on possible high-ranking whistleblowers within the Department of Justice and revelations that a murdered ICE agent was investigating Fast and Furious.

Atlanta GA- June 15th – Award-winning citizen journalist and blogger Mike Vanderboegh along with regular AAR contributor and award-winning journalist David Codrea, join host Mark Walters to blow the lid off of Eric Holder’s and Janet Napolitano’s cover-up of Operation Fast and Furious on nationally syndicated Armed American Radio this weekend. (AAR is nationally syndicated on the Salem Radio Network) 

Vanderboegh and Codrea, the two men who originally broke the story now known as Operation Fast and Furious, will discuss claims from “multiple previously highly credible sources” that at least one, and possibly two high-ranking sources from within the Justice Department have “come in from the cold” seeking whistleblower status and “hold the keys to the kingdom”…with knowledge of Eric Holder's actions before and after" the 4 February 2011 DOJ letter denying that the DOJ and its subordinate agencies knew about ‘gunwalking’.” 

In a second bombshell revelation, Vanderboegh reports that murdered ICE agent Jaime Zapata was investigating Fast and Furious weapons—despite Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s sworn testimony that there was no connection. 

Armed American Radio is one of the fastest growing talk radio shows in America, and the fastest growing pro-gun show in the nation. AAR airs live nationwide every Sunday from 8-11pm ET, 5-8pm PT. Each week Mark Walters discusses the right to carry a concealed firearm, training, tips and carry techniques, the politics of the right to bear arms and the responsibility that law-abiding citizens have to carry a firearm for their own defense. 

For more information and to schedule interviews: 

Please contact: 
Mark Walters
Host
Armed American Radio Network
www.armedamericanradio.com
mark@armedamericanradio.org
or call: 386-AAR-Mark (386)-227-6275
Armed American Radio is syndicated on the Salem Radio Network. For media kit information, please visit http://www.srnonline.com/talk/talk-walters.shtml

Saturday, March 28, 2009

See Eric Holder Lie

I, Eric Holder, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States...[More]
Good one!

But you're a little late, Wayne LaPierre. You not only stood by while the enemy gained a beachhead, you made it known our "allies" could usher him in with no repercussions.

And still with the "enforce existing laws on the books."

So it is the official position of the NRA that "gun control" is an effective crime-fighting strategy? That seems a hell of a concession to just hand to the Bradys...

Monday, February 02, 2009

Presumptive Confirmation a Preemptive Surrender

Tonight's the night.
The Senate will vote Monday on Eric Holder’s nomination to become the 82nd attorney general, with confirmation all but guaranteed.
Guess who put out an editorial strongly warning us about how dangerously anti-gun he is? [More]

This is my final warning against Eric Holder before tonight's vote. I've done everything I can.

It's a pity others chose not to.

Please share the link.

Saturday, September 20, 2014

Terry sister assails latest administration Fast and Furious stonewalling

“Learning that Eric Holder has asked the judge to delay turning over thousands of Fast and Furious documents has enraged me,” Terry-Willis acknowledged. “I thought about writing Eric Holder a letter to ask him one simple question ‘Why?’ I came back down to reality assuming, as usual, the question would fall on deaf ears and never be answered. [More]
Today's Gun Rights Examiner report reminds readers that for some, it's personal, and very, very painful.

Monday, August 11, 2014

Capitalists Selling Rope

“This interested Eric Holder,” Gentry says. “He wondered how we might be able to control who was or wasn’t authorized. I stopped him right there. I looked right across a table at Eric Holder — yeah, the attorney general of the United States — and told him, ‘If you try to mandate my smart-gun technology, I’ll burn it down.’ The Intelligun is designed to save lives, not restrict freedom.” [More]
Yeah, except then he turns around and says "“Government be damned, we need this potentially life-saving technology.”

Minter's premise that this holds promise if only we can get the government and the antis to back off is perplexing, because he clearly groks the dangers. If wishes were fishes, we'd all cast nets.

Until that piece of the equation gets figured out, and it'll take more than simplistic platitudes about "need[ing] truth to undo the spin," the only proper response from any gun owner who gives a damn about freedom is to boycott the hell out of any Quisling who proceeds to market.  And the fault for that lies totally with the monopoly of violence cultists.

NRO. Figures.

[Via Michael G]

Monday, November 24, 2008

How Many Blogs Does the World Need?

Those ancient debates about whether the Internet lowers journalistic standards and drags the Mainstream Media into the slime have become irrelevant. For a large chunk of the electorate--the young chunk--the Internet has become the major source of information.
Obviously, it's not a question of need, but one might ask the same thing about "Authorized Journalists," particularly when the first blog leftist Time cites in its Top 25 is the fascist HuffPo.

Eric Holder willing, we'll continue occupying our little corner to bring to light what you won't see in the public/private partnership media. And Eric Holder not willing, I suspect we'll be getting...uh...creative at "guerilla marketing" by then...

[Via Joe G]

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Fire Eric Holder: Send Money

First, please sign our National Petition to Fire Eric Holder...Second, after you sign our Petition, please help NRA's fight this critical battle by making a contribution of $20, $40, $60, $80, $100 or the most generous amount you can afford to NRA Voice of Freedom today. [More]

The first part sounds good on the surface, but what effect will that have on gathering evidence against him, charging him and prosecuting him if he's out of the way and no longer an active target for focus?

Anyway, it's not a "real" petition and it asks for money--Hey, that's exactly what that lying "NRA Winning Team" asshole accused me of doing in his attempt to sabotage my successful one-man drive to  remove "collective rights" language from the Federal Register. And who then went on to do exactly what he falsely accused me of doing.

Go figure.

Kind of funny that the folks who had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Gunwalker are now using it for fundraising--of course, I also thought it was kind of funny when they made great hay of their leadership in it at the annual meeting--all the while relegating the award ceremony for those who actually have led on this story off premises, out of sight and away from them.

In terms of the donations they're asking for, I have a better idea: If you have the money to throw at self-serving grandstanding like this, why not instead support the guy taking point in this story? Is a buck a month voluntary subscription really too much to ask for all the value you get from all the work he does?

Sunday, September 21, 2014

"Authorized Journalists/Real Reporters/Legitmate News Media" Defending the Stone Wall

Anyone who argues that the statement the sister of Brian Terry put out isn't news -- after Eric Holder once more stonewalled the investigation -- is simply not credible, and is carrying water for those hiding things.  Those are the people I call "Authorized Journalists/Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists." Diane Feinstein and Joe Biden respectively call them "real reporters and "legitimate news media."

Once again they are failing to inform. See for yourself: There are plenty of hits on Kelly Terry-Willis' name on a regular web search -- but a NEWS search produces only one result, and that should be an object lesson to all on shameful media complicity/sins of omission.

She sent her statement out two days ago, and being a one-man operation, I needed to wait until yesterday to make time for it. What excuse do "news" organizations, with staff and resources, have for not reacting by or even before now? As you can also see, just like with the Reese family and so many stories, if this is to get out, we can't rely on anyone but ourselves.

Will it get out?

That's out of my hands now.  It's in yours.

If Eric Holder has his way, the answer will be "No."

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Texas Campus Carry Bill Scheduled for Tomorrow and Holder Stiffs Smith

From Jack Burch, via email:
Just an update on campus carry in Texas. Last Tuesday Senate Bill 354 was heard in the Criminal Justice committee with public comment. After 4.5 hours of public comment the committee left it pending. I called the committee clerk this morning to find out the status of this bill as the committee is scheduled to meet again today. She told me that the bill was not currently scheduled for a vote but felt that it would probably be voted on by the committee on the floor of the Senate by the committee members instead of in the committee chambers. A call to the author of the bill, Senator Wentworth, was fruitless as well as they said they knew nothing. The bill has the support of at least 5 of the 8 committee members at this time so passage is likely. As it progresses I will keep you informed. In the house the bill has been passed out of committee and is currently waiting to go to the floor for a vote by the entire house. I suspect it will wait for the Senate to move forward before it goes to the house floor.

As an update, he just sent me this:

SB354 Texas Campus carry is scheduled for a vote in the Criminal Justice committee tomorrow. No question that it will pass and be heard on the Senate floor. Rumor control has it that one senator will offer a floor amendment to change the bill to require private institutions to allow CHL carry. This senator is against the bill and is trying to bring problems to it on the floor. In any event carry in college buildings looks like a good bet.

Also:
On another note, I just got off the phone with Cong. Lamar Smith's office to find out what he is doing as the chair of the Judiciary Committee on Fast & Furious. As you might remember Mr. Smith sent a letter to Eric Holder demanding answers and gave him a deadline of 18 March to answer. To date I have not seen any answers published. To no surprise I got "We are not aware of any reply by Mr. Holder". I contacted our local rep from his office and she stated that she would call and find out what she could. Guess I'm a dumb redneck but it looks like they will not answer until Holder et al are brought in front of a committee and put under oath. Wonder how long it will take to get them there. Adding pressure where possible.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Gottlieb to Lieberman: "Investigate ATF"

In a letter to Sen. Lieberman, CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb reminded him that press reports and documents relating to Gunrunner indicate that the ATF “abetted the movement of firearms into the illicit gun market, and ultimately to drug cartels in Mexico.” Gottlieb also expressed his surprise that Lieberman’s letter to Holder did not mention either Gunrunner or Operation Fast-and-Furious, a project handled by the Phoenix ATF field office. [More]
We discussed Lieberman's abdication of credibility in this in yesterday's GRE and shared a letter in today's.
 

Dave Workman also addressed this in his column yesterday, reported on this latest development today, and just sent me the text of Gottlieb's letter, below:
The Honorable Joseph Lieberman
Chairman
Committee on Homeland Security And Government Affairs
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Lieberman:

As you must certainly be aware, thanks largely to the efforts of your colleague, Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, there is an on-going investigation regarding allegations that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ Project Gunrunner and Operation Fast and Furious actually abetted the movement of firearms into the illicit gun market, and ultimately to drug cartels in Mexico.

Yet, in a letter you wrote two days ago to Attorney General Eric Holder, supporting ATF plans to require federal firearms licensees to report multiple long gun sales, you skip over this serious allegation as though it did not exist. In recent weeks, I have traveled to Arizona twice on business, and both times I have discussed this case with concerned Arizona residents.

Frankly, Senator, I am stunned that your May 16 letter to Mr. Holder makes no mention of Project Gunrunner or Operation Fast and Furious, or the seriousness of the allegations against ATF. Surely, you must know that ATF has almost entirely shuffled its management team at the Phoenix office in recent weeks since this controversy first erupted, reassigning and replacing them. That strongly suggests the agency knows there is and was a problem, and they are now trying to clean up a mess.

It is that mess which has allegedly allowed thousands of firearms to be purchased and transported by suspected gun smugglers. The agency to which you now advocate giving more power over firearms transactions in southwest states was responsible for allowing criminal suspects to complete multiple purchases of so-called “assault rifles,” despite the concerns of those licensed dealers you would have ATF micro-manage, and over the objections of its own field agents.

Senator Lieberman, you are widely regarded by friend and foe alike as a good and decent man. That is why I am astonished that you now support a strategy that places firearms dealers and their customers under additional scrutiny of an agency that may very well be largely responsible for creating a problem you now expect it to resolve.

CBS News and Fox News, several newspapers and independent on-line journalists have been covering this controversy for months. Surely you must be aware of this.

It is not the southwest firearms dealers who need investigating, Senator, but the ATF. It is not those gun dealers who should be held accountable for the flood of illicit firearms into Mexico, but the ATF officials who not only allowed it to happen, but encouraged it. Instead of supporting this new reporting strategy, I urge you to instead exercise your considerable influence to support Senator Grassley’s investigation of the Gunrunner controversy.

Sincerely,

Alan M. Gottlieb
Chairman
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms