The Walking Dead Returns  by Tom Reynolds

Formerly, Newsweek’s distribution seemed to be primarily in the waiting rooms of doctor’s offices.  So, when Covid removed magazines from those rooms, it was natural to assume that Newsweek had gone out of business.  Imagine my surprise when it suddenly reappeared, risen and walking the earth like some brain-dead zombie in the “Walking Dead”.

In fact, Newsweek’s writer David H. Freedman all but equates the Walking Dead’s zombies to gun owners in his article “Millions of Angry Armed Americans Stand Ready To Seize Power If Trump loses in 2024”.  Apparently, Newsweek’s readers are expected to be just as mindless as those TV zombies were when they overthrew the U.S. government.  

Like Custer at the Little Big Horn, Freedman fights a losing battle, this time with facts and not against arrows.  For instance, he says, “…militias, which have been a feature of American life at least since the Ku Klux Klan rose to power after the Civil War”.  As a liberal, it’s fully expected that he is not familiar with the U.S. Constitution which, famously, mentions militias in its 2^nd Amendment.  Or that militias featured prominently in the Revolutionary War.  Both occurred 75 to 85 years before the Civil War ended. But as a writer, not as a liberal, shouldn’t he do some research before he impugns militias by linking their appearance to the KKK? 

Then he says, “In 2020, 17 million Americans bought 40 million guns and in 2021 we’re on track to add another 20 million. If historical trends hold, the buyers will be overwhelmingly white…”.  But, The Guardian  (and numerous other sources) report, “…approximately half of all new gun owners were female and nearly half were people of color.”  I know he’s a journalist and not a mathematician, but 3^rd grade math indicates that nearly half being people of color doesn’t leave an overwhelming number to be white.    Whatever Freedman believes are “historical trends” certainly didn’t hold true.  So much for journalistic research.  But gun grabbing liberals never let inconvenient facts get in their way.

Freedman then warns how, “America's massive and mostly Republican gun-rights movement…raises the threat of armed, large-scale attacks around the 2024 presidential election—attacks that could make the January 6 insurrection look like a toothless stunt by comparison”.  January 6^th wasn’t toothless by comparison to anything- it was toothless standing on its own!  Or did Freeman miss that not one protester fired a shot or not one has been charged with insurrection or that Biden was confirmed and inaugurated as president?

Then he wonders if the 2024 election might bring, “…protesters and counter-protesters into the street…plunging the country into chaos”.  He also writes, “Nearly a third of Republicans agree that ‘true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.’" Does he mean protesting and resorting to violence like Black Lives Matter and Antifa did in their “mostly peaceful protests”?  I may have missed it, but did Freedman write, in comparable terms, about those protests? I’m going to go out not very far on a limb and guess – not.

He also predicts that any violence over 2024 election results could only come from Republicans and, then, only if Trump loses a close race.  He dismisses any worry about violent Democrat protests by writing, “If Democratic protests include any violence, as was the case with several Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 in mostly isolated instances…”  Mostly isolated instances!  Can you begin to imagine how much damage would have been done if the “mostly peaceful protests” had included more than only “isolated instances” of violence?

Freedman throws out a scare tactic when he states that the Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen could lead “to the overthrow of the U.S. government”, because people will be allowed to carry guns “anywhere”, including while protesting in D.C.  Can you imagine – can you just image – Americans exercising their 2^nd Amendment rights in support of their 1^st Amendment rights?  A liberal’s worst nightmare!  Call out the National Guard and fence off the Capitol before that trend catches on!

Freedman continues in a similar way throughout the article but he does stumble upon one reasonable theory.  The vast majority of guns belong to Republicans and if the radical left pushes the country into a civil war, "One side has about 8 trillion bullets... Wonder who would win?"

Newsweek certainly can be compared to the brain dead for publishing this article.

A Christmas To Remember  by Tom Reynolds

After a devastating defeat in New York City, where surrendering Continental soldiers were bayoneted to death by Hessians, George Washington led his army on a retreat through New Jersey and into Pennsylvania.  At Valley Forge, Washington set up a winter camp and pondered his next move. 

The enlistments of the bulk of his army were due to expire in a few weeks and there was little hope of many reenlistments.  Not just because of the devastating defeat in New York but the army was undersupplied in almost every area; many soldiers had no shoes and had been wearing the same clothes – now rags - for months; food was scarce.  Defeatism ran through the army.

There is no record of Washington contemplating giving up but, certainly, some of his top generals must have contemplated getting the best possible terms from the British and surrendering.  Instead, Washington gained control over whatever negative emotions he had and formulated a plan, which led to the most important Christmas in American history.

With the temperature barely above freezing, on the early evening of December 25, 1776, the Continental Army loaded onto boats, in a freezing rain storm that lasted all night.  They crossed the ice clogged Delaware River in three groups; one group did not make it across and while a second group did make it across, it turned around and went back.  Only Washington’s group was able to march to the attack.

Hours behind schedule, with one-third strength, they arrived at their target, Trenton New Jersey.  Officers reported to Washington that the ice storm had soaked the muskets and many could not fire because of wet powder.  These officers suggested that the attack be abandoned.  Washington’s reply was the equivalent of “fix bayonets”.

While the enemy was yawning and waking up, they were suddenly attacked.  The Continental Army, in rags with long hair and matted beards all coated in rain and mud, came screaming down on the Hessians.  It must have looked to the Hessians like the army-from-hell had come from the depths to kill them.  The battle was brief and the Hessians surrendered. 

There would be another winter of deprivation at Valley Forge and a worse winter at Morristown in 1779-80, which was the coldest winter in 400 years.  But in 1776, in what was the potential breaking point of the Revolutionary war, when all hope seemed to be lost, Washington did not lose hope.  He and his army persevered and they eventually won.  They set an example that should live today: we’re Americans; beware; we’d cross a frozen river on Christmas to kill our enemies. 

Today, many are dejected and in a funk over the results of last year’s election.  Morale is cratering.  Summoning the energy to continue the fight to preserve the Constitution seems beyond some people’s wills.  To them it would be easier to surrender to the likes of Alexandria Octavio-Cortez and tell her, “You win.  We give up.  Do with the USA what you will.”   

We need to remember that many of us took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.  That oath had no expiration date!  If you didn’t take that oath, it’s not too late to commit yourself to that principle. 

Thomas Paine wrote, “These are the times that try men’s souls.  The sunshine soldier and the summer patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman”.

Are you a sunshine soldier and summer patriot that will find other excuses to occupy your time, in this modern crisis, and let the Constitution be shredded by the forces of Socialism?  Do you believe our current situation is less winnable than it appeared on Christmas morning, 1776? 

Paine also wrote, “Tyranny like hell is not easily conquered, but…the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph”.  Did anyone believe that the Socialist lust for power would just go away and die when confronted?  Did people believe that Donald Trump could take on the entire Washington swamp by himself?

When we were born in the USA, we won the lottery!  It’s time to pay the price of that lottery ticket.  Our forefathers were willing to pay that price, we need to join with them.

Enjoy the holidays.  Reenergize and decide whether or not you are a “sunshine soldier” and will surrender to A O-C or if you are willing to stand up and fight for the USA: its Constitution; its traditions; its future; and your family.  The choice is clear - get engaged or surrender.

Merry Christmas from SCOPE!  Stay safe!  Enjoy your family and friends!

American Dunkirk  by Tom Reynolds

During World War 2, the evacuation of the British army from Dunkirk, in France, is celebrated as the great achievement that it was.  Cut off and about to be destroyed, the British army was saved to fight another day.  After Dunkirk, America eventually came to Britain’s rescue, but the history of WW2 would certainly have played out differently without the Dunkirk evacuation.

America had its own version of Dunkirk during the Revolutionary War and the American crossing of the East River was even more important; there was no other nation to come to America’s rescue if its army had been destroyed in Brooklyn.  It would have ended the revolution in a victory for Britain. 

On July 4^th 1776, the United States declared its independence from Great Britain.  While independence was being celebrated in Philadelphia, 23,000 British regular soldiers and 10,000 Hessian mercenaries were being unloaded by British ships in New York Harbor.   

George Washington was occupying New York City by order of the Continental Congress, even though he knew it was not defendable against the combined army and naval forces of Great Britain. 

On August 26^th, the first battle began on Long Island and the right wing of the American forces was about to be cut off and destroyed.  But a group of Americans who were variously called “Washington’s Immortals” and the “Maryland 400” did not retreat. Instead, they made a suicidal charge which bought time and allowed the American army to survive and prevented the British and Hessians from bringing their plans to fruition.  For their efforts, the Americans were bayoneted by the Hessians.

Less than two months after the Declaration of Independence was signed, the revolution was about to fail as a large portion of the American army had retreated to Brooklyn with the East River at their backs.  But the British generals did not recognize the appalling state of the Americans and, more importantly, remembered their horrendous losses taking Bunker Hill. So, they laid siege and used the Royal Navy to attempt to cut off the East River from retreat.

Washington knew his only chance was to cross the mile wide East River - with its treacherous tidal currents - to the temporary safety of Manhattan.  It had to be done immediately, after dark, in a horrendous rain storm. Multiple crossings would be needed.  Security had to be airtight and it was so secret that Washington did not tell his officers about the night’s plans.  John Glover, the leader of the “Marblehead Regiment” of mariners that would ferry the army across was not told of the purpose until it was time to man the boats. The crossing would be made in total darkness with the mariners depending on their experience to guide them to the other shore.  The boats were a combination of rowed and sailed boats.

The tides and winds cooperated for the first two hours and the multiple crossings went well.  Then, the tides shifted and the mariners were unsuccessfully rowing against tides and wind, making it impossible to complete the retreat before sunrise and the British becoming aware of what was happening.  Then, the winds died and shortly thereafter shifted in the American’s favor.

Having lost time because of the wind and tide shift, dawn was coming.  Panicked men were fighting for a place in the boats, which caused further confusion and angered Washington, who picked up the biggest rock he could find and threatened to sink the boat unless order was restored.  It was.

When dawn arose, Americans were still in Brooklyn but a thick fog rose over the Brooklyn side, but not the Manhattan side.  A fog was very unusual at that time of the year and it hid the Americans and allowed the complete evacuation.  Only one boat with three men on it was captured by the British.

Eventually, the colonial army was completely driven out of New York and it retreated across New Jersey to a place in Pennsylvania called Valley Forge, where things became even more desperate – and a more famous river crossing was to come.

The Maryland 400 made a suicidal charge that bought time enough to save he American army.  Luck certainly played a part in the successful evacuation when the wind turned and, later, an unusual fog allowed the whole army to safely evacuate. 

Or maybe God really is on our side. 

Another reason to be thankful this Christmas.

July 4^th, 1776 – Not for the Faint Hearted  by Tom Reynolds

On July 4^th 1776, the United States declared its independence from Great Britain.  It was not some academic effort - it had real world consequences.  One of the signers, Benjamin Rush, recalled the moment: “Do you recollect the pensive and awful silence which pervaded the house when we were called up, one after the other, to the table of the President of Congress, to subscribe what was believed by many at the time to be our own death warrants?”

The British had recently put down an insurrection in Ireland and the sentence of the revolutionaries was: “You are to be drawn on hurdles to the place of execution, where you are to be hanged by the neck, but not until you are dead, for while you are still living your bodies are to be taken down, your bowels to be torn out and burned before your faces, your heads then cut off, and your bodies are to be divided into four quarters.”

Of late, our forefathers have come under a lot of undeserved criticism.  All but forgotten is the immense personal courage that it took to sign the Declaration of Independence.    If the Revolutionary War had failed, perhaps the British would celebrate George Washington day in the same way they celebrate Guy Fawkes day; just another failed revolutionary. 

As Americans, we have a lot to be thankful for at Christmas and those that risked their lives to gain us our freedom need to be thanked, not denigrated.

Why Do We Need More “Ghost Gun” Laws?!  by Tom Reynolds

In 1988, The United States Undetectable Firearms Act made it illegal to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm that is not detectable by walk-through metal detection or any firearm with major components that do not generate an accurate image using standard airport imaging technology.  The law had a 10-year life.

Then, in 1998, Congress renewed the law for five years.

Then, in 2003, Congress re-authorized the ban for another ten years.  

Then, in 2013, H.R. 3626 extended the act for another ten years.

It seems pretty clear that what are derided as “Ghost Guns” are already illegal under federal law.

A current lawsuit against the District of Columbia is a good example of the anti-2A’s confusion with all things involving guns: “District legislation in question is so poorly thought out and written that the City Council has managed to criminalize the possession of a vast array of popular, common handguns that it regularly allows residents to register, including the very handgun it issues to its police officers."

Speaker Trump  by Tom Reynolds

Tuesday, we wrote to remind you about some of the interesting side issues surrounding Biden’s seemingly loss of mental acuity and the possibility of Kamala Harris ascending to the presidency.  For 2A supporters, neither is a good option. 

But in SCOPE’s April 12^th Email, we wrote:

“And just for fun – imagine that Donald Trump runs for Congress from Florida in 2022 and is elected.  Once elected, he runs for Speaker of the House in a Republican majority Congress and wins.  That would put Trump next in line after the Vice President or first in line if Harris moves to the Presidency.  Can you imagine…can you even begin to imagine…the left-wing media’s frenzy!”

Trump as Speaker, a fun thought.  Then, on July 21^st, this was written in by Rusty Weiss in the Political Insider:

“Representative Brendan Boyle (D-PA) introduced a bill that would only allow sitting House members to serve as Speaker after Donald Trump said the post would be ‘interesting’.”

“Boyle, having seemingly resolved all other matters of concern for his constituents, moved on to legislation specifically targeting the former President.”

“Though the role has never been filled by anyone outside the chamber, the Constitution does not specifically state that the Speaker must be a House member. Anyone chosen by the House can serve as Speaker.”

Then, on December 8^th, Weiss wrote again in The Political Insider:

“Representative Matt Gaetz says he will move to nominate Donald Trump as the next Speaker should Republicans win back the House in 2022.”

“Gaetz says he’s gone so far as to discuss the matter with the former President.”

“When asked by a reporter if he’d like to see Trump as Speaker, Gaetz responded, “I would.”

“Pressed further on if he’s discussed it with him he added, “I have.”

The Florida congressman though said he likes to keep “conversations with the former president between the two of us.”

Who knows how seriously President Trump will take this proposal and its effect on any plans he might have to run for President in 2024.  But it would be ground breaking for a non-House member and for and ex-president to becomes Speaker - and we all know how Trump likes being a ground breaker!   

Given Trump’s pro 2^nd Amendment stances and the Democrat Party’s virulent anti 2^nd Amendment efforts, pro 2A supporters should be enjoying any nervousness going on in Washington at the thought of Trump as Speaker of the House.  The conversation probably goes something like:

Trump couldn’t be serious about this………could he????

Presidential Succession (Update)  by Tom Reynolds

Last April 12^th, SCOPE wrote about the problems the Democrats had – even then - with Biden’s apparent mental issues.  Politically, things have gotten worse with Biden’s and Harris’s (well deserved) plummeting approval ratings.  There are numerous articles being currently written about this issue, but the bottom line is that the Democrats don’t have any good political choices.  Below is a reprint of parts of the April 12^th article, which explains the box that Democrats are in.  The issues raised in it are even more relevant, today.

If Biden should step down or be removed in his first two years, it will be obvious that Democrat insiders knew, prior to the election, that he was failing and hid it from the voters.  That should cause a major negative reaction amongst voters, even amongst the usual Democrat supporters.  There would be legitimate questions: concerning the leader of the free world’s ability to lead; about the judgment of the man with his finger on the nuclear button; about the man tasked by the Constitution with defending it – and thus defending us – from all enemies foreign and domestic; was he incapable of doing his job; what unelected person was acting as President while pulling the strings from behind the curtain; who was really responsible for all the Executive Orders Biden signed?  The legitimate uproar would be overwhelming.  And it would be worse if Biden’s policies are failing at the time he steps down. 

If Kamala Harris did succeed to the Presidency within the first two years of Biden’s term, the Vice President’s position would need to be filled.  She would nominate someone but that person must be approved by a majority of both houses of Congress. Here’s the monkey wrench in Democrat’s planning; currently, both Houses of Congress are Democrat controlled but the Senate is split exactly 50-50 with the Vice President’s vote being the deciding factor that gives Democrats their control.  If there is no Vice President, the Democrats have only a tie and must seduce at least one Republican vote in order to approve a Harris nominee for Vice President.  (And if one or more Democrats do not vote for the Harris’ nominee, that makes the situation more difficult.)  As a side issue, while the Vice Presidency is vacant, the Democrats do not have a tie breaking vote on any proposed legislation.  Oops!  

This would force Harris to nominate someone very much less radical than the current President and Vice President.  Joe Manchin, the Senator from West Virginia, comes to mind but that would lose Democrats their majority in the Senate, at least until a replacement election was held, and maybe after the replacement election since West Virginia tends Republican.  

This leaves Democrat insiders with the option of delaying Biden’s removal until two years have passed and after an off-year election in 2022, which causes them more problems, (besides putting their own political careers above the safety and security of the nation).  Historically, the President’s party loses seats in Congress during an off-year election.  If Democrats should lose one seat in the Senate, they lose their majority.  If Democrats lose about a half dozen seats in the House, they lose their majority.  Losing one or both houses of Congress is a real possibility and must weigh heavily on Democrats’ decision making. 

If Kamala Harris should succeed to the Presidency after the 2022 election, she would nominate someone but, as previously stated, that person must be approved by a majority of both houses of Congress.  And if one or both of those houses has a Republican majority, a nomination would certainly have to be very much less radical than the current President and Vice President.  And depending on how firm the Republicans held, the person could be middle to right leaning.  

But it gets worse for Democrats.

When the Vice Presidency is vacant, the next person in line is the House Speaker and next after that comes the President Pro tempore of the Senate.  If either or both houses are under Republican control, they would be Republicans! If Republicans control the House, they might be very slow in approving any Harris’ nominee, in order to keep a Republican next in line.  And what if the Republicans decided that impeachment payback was in order at the same time that the Vice Presidency was vacant?

Back to present day. 

Many current articles are now writing about removing Harris from the Vice Presidency but none spell out how to do it:

She “aint gonna” resign, that’s for sure. 

She may be incompetent but that is not a basis for removal under the 25^th Amendment.

She could be impeached for her statements made about the riots in 2020.  If the Democrats are desperate enough to save their own skins, some might cross the aisle and vote for impeachment.  That would be good for the country but impeaching a semi-black woman might hurt their personal political support amongst those typically Democrat voters, so it’s not likely.

SCOPE has often said that the Socialist policies always fail.  Our problem is that the failure would take the rest of us down with it.  Twin international crises loom with China/Taiwan and Russia/Ukraine as well as always bothersome Iran and North Korea creating mischief. Then there continues to be the national problems with runaway inflation, a southern border open to criminals and Covid, a possible recession, and government overreach under Covid.  We need (the world needs) wisdom and strong leadership in the White House and that isn’t happening or likely to happen under the status quo.

In Case you Missed These from Steve Getman/Tom Reynolds

Schuyler County’s SCOPE Chairman Steven Getman publishes a monthly Legal Update on our Facebook page.  Some issues that he covers are also covered in our emails or in Firing Lines but we want to be sure the others don’t get lost.  Below are some of the items that Steve covers and also the links, if you want to further explore the issues. 

Gillibrand pushes for new legislation amid recent violence in Rochester

In response to Rochester’s state of emergency, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand says she's working to address recent violence with new legislation. That includes banning assault weapons, enforcing a federal anti-gun trafficking law, ensuring reliable background checks and creating a data protection agency that has oversight over social media.

"There's also enormous amounts of anger and division in our communities that is fueling violence,” Gillibrand said. “A lot of that is caused by disinformation, lies and by social media platforms that are unregulated."

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/rochester/politics/2021/11/21/gillibrand-pushes-fornew-legislation-amid-recent-violence-in-rochester

Note from SCOPE: In one of her last acts as Rochester’s Mayor, Lovely Warren announced that Rochester was pairing with the anti-gun Brady Center to help prevent gun violence.  To validate this, she says “They did this in Chicago…”  The anti-gunners often say stupid things but using Chicago as an example of a successful gun program may be at the top of that list of stupid comments.  

New York cracks down on ghost guns, but will new laws be effective in curbing violence?

The trio of bills ban the sale and possession of ghost guns and requires gunsmiths to register and serialize firearms along with unfinished frames or receivers.

Tom King, Executive Director of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, believes the legislation won’t be effective in curbing gun violence. “Firearms laws are only obeyed by the lawful citizens of the state. Criminals do not pay any attention to any laws that are passed,” said King. “They get ahold of guns all the time. There is a criminal network in the United States. Guns move along in this network,” added King.

https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/new-york-cracks-down-on-ghost-guns-but-will-newlaws-be-effective-in-curbing-violence

Note from SCOPE: King’s point needs repeating over and over.  The laws only affect law abiding people and do nothing to stop criminals who do not obey laws.

The Amendment That Remade America

The First? The Second? No, the 14th—the basis for every claim against a state government for violating individual rights. That amendment, among its other provisions, bars states from abridging “the privileges or immunities” of citizens or depriving any person of life, liberty or property “without due process of law.” It’s best known for guaranteeing to all persons “the equal protection of the laws.”

The historical evidence is overwhelming that Second Amendment rights belong to individuals. But if there’s any doubt about that, raised by the existence of the Militia Clause of the Second Amendment, there’s no doubt whatsoever that the 14th Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause was aimed at the protection of the individual right—in this case the individual rights of the freed blacks to keep and carry their own weapons.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fourteenth-amendment-states-civil-rights-federalismoriginalism-abortion-dobbs-jackson-11635535364?reflink=share_mobilewebshare

Without False Claims About The Risk of Concealed Handgun Permit Holders, The Left Has Nothing

Since 1976, 18 states eliminated “proper cause” requirements, and gun control advocates have consistently predicted disaster. But in state after state, concealed handgun permit holders have proved to be extremely law-abiding, and Right-to-Carry states have never even held a legislative hearing to consider moving back to “proper cause.”

In Florida and Texas, permit holders are convicted of firearms-related violations at one-twelfth of the rate at which police officers. In the 19 states with comprehensive permit revocation data, the average revocation rate is one-tenth of one percent. Usually, permit revocations occur because someone moved or died or forgot to bring their permit while carrying.

Academics have published fifty-two peer-reviewed, empirical studies on concealed carry. Of these, 25 found that allowing people to carry reduces violent crime, and 15 found no significant effect. A minority (12) observed increases in violent crime. These 12, however, suffer from a systematic error to varying degrees: they tend to focus on the last 20 years and compare states that recently passed concealed carry laws with more lenient states that had sustained growth in permits over the past two decades. The finding that crime rose relatively in such states is consistent with permit holders reducing crime.

https://townhall.com/columnists//johnrlottjr/2021/11/11/without-false-claims-about-therisk-of-concealed-handgun-permit-holders-the-left-n2598

Note from SCOPE:  Some good sources of information on gun laws are:

John Lott Jr.  https://crimeresearch.org/  

David Kopel  https://davekopel.org/

Allen Korwin  https://www.gunlaws.com/

Soros Strikes Locally  by Tom Reynolds

SCOPE was often written about gun owners not being active in politics and, especially, not voting.  The left, on the other hand, loves politics! 

No one epitomizes the radical left’s drive for power more than George Soros.  Researching what Soros funds is difficult as there are so many layers to the onion of organizations that he finances. A few examples are Indivisibles, the Sunrise Movement, the Tides Foundation, Tides Advocacy and Tides.  There is even an advocacy group they support in California called SCOPE, but it's nowhere related to what our mission is and could never be confused with what we do. https://scopela.org/

Soros has made headlines funding big city radical District Attorneys and other radical groups.  Perhaps you don’t think of Sorors influence in local terms but you could not be more wrong.  SCOPE’s Oneida-Herkimer Chairman, Bohdan Rabarsky, has done some research on this in his area.  Here is some of what he found.

Before Donald Trump was even inaugurated, there was an organization formed to counter his election, called Indivisible. This group now claims to have 6,000+ chapters throughout America.  The Indivisible groups can’t be dismissed. There’s probably a chapter near you - you just might not realize it.  They have a general website, https://indivisible.org/  and chapters usually have a Facebook page, with limited information unless you log in as a member.  It doesn’t allow you to comment or like - only share.

Also in 2016, Congresswomen Claudia Tenney was elected for her 1^st term.  She was a strong Trump supporter.  That fact drew the attention of the local chapter of Indivisible Mohawk Valley, which proceeded with a vicious campaign of protests and rallies against Trump and Tenney for almost every week, for 2 years. They held protests on the sidewalk in front of her Utica Congressional office every Friday. They held protests at Tenney’s satellite offices whenever she was at those offices. They wrote letters-to-the-editor that hit every newspaper in the 7 counties representing Tenney’s 22^nd Congressional district. Indivisible was successful and Tenney lost her reelection bid.  (She was subsequently reelected in 2020 by a handful of votes.)

The Indivisibles are very well organized and are very well funded. You have to peel back the layers, but sooner or later, you’ll connect the dots to many of George Soros’s organizations. The woman that runs the Indivisible Mohawk Valley chapter comes from South Dakota, relocated to Clinton, NY and she’s Indivisible’s only local paid organizer. The rest are volunteers.   Whenever indivisible has a rally or protest, BLM, Citizen NY and Sunrise Movement are also usually present.

Give Indivisible’s members credit - they are dedicated to their cause.  So far, they’ve gotten their members elected to the Utica Common Council, Oneida County Board of Legislators and various town & village boards. They know how to organize and they think nothing of getting together on a Sunday afternoon at the town Community Center with 30 or 40 members in support of a candidate.

Other groups that they’re involved with locally are The Working Families Party, Citizen’s Action of NY and the Sunrise Movement. They build up community support by having giveaways of diapers, formula, food, back packs, etc. They accept donations, but when added to Soros’ funding, they have “big bucks” that they can use build a political power when it comes time for voting.

Another group to keep an eye on is called Sunrise Movement. They have 45-50 chapters in New York State, located in colleges & universities. We have one here at Hamilton College. They're made up of students and the group uses the various skills of the students to help promote their group. They hide behind the Green Movement, but like AOC's Green New Deal, they promote the entire radical left agenda.

What do Indivisible and Sunrise also have in common? They're very much anti 2nd Amendment.

The New Eastcoast Arms Collectors Associates owned by David Petronis had a gun show at the Clinton Arena, a municipal arena owned by the town of Kirkland, for many years. It was a huge success.  It never had a security problem so the town law enforcement liked it and the town made money off of it, as did the dealers and the promoter. Then in 2017 or 2018 Indivisible Mohawk Valley showed up at a town board meeting with 15-20 of its members holding signs. They also brought along the TV media that they notified and charged that minors could possibly get in to buy guns, the promoter lacked security and the Clinton Arena was too close to a school, (never mind the gun show was held in July when school was let out for the summer). They convinced the town board which told the promoter he would have to provide round the clock security and he would have to reimburse the town to the tune of $7,000-$8,000 for the 3-day event. Therefore, he cancelled the show and any future shows and now he only promotes his shows in private facilities, no more public funded facilities.

As radical left policies fail on a nationwide basis, many in the media are predicting a “Red Wave” in the 2022 elections.  So, gun owners can just sit back and ignore politics, as they have done before, and the Red Wave will just happen.  Wrong!  As Bohdan has shown, Soros and company are active and well-funded. They’re not conceding anything and Soros has the money to fund their efforts. Nancy Pelosi controls the House by 5 votes.  Tenney won in 2020 by 109 votes; do you think that Indivisibles and Sunrise in Oneida-Herkimer might be energized to take back that seat?

We need to reach out to those gun owners who won’t get active.  Who won’t vote.  We have the potential power and 2022 seems to provide the opportunity to take back control of our country from Biden, Pelosi and Schumer.  SCOPE will be doing its best but we can do more and better with your help in your chapters and at the state level.  If you think 2021 has been bad, keep Pelosi and Schumer in power until 2024 and see how really bad it can get.  It’s time to get involved.

Thoughts on Rittenhouse Trial  by Tom Reynolds

The left is very critical of gun ownership, but they don’t seem to know even the simplest, most basic things about guns.  Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial filled the news the past few days, but there are some things that haven’t generally been discussed, possibly because the leftist media doesn’t know - or even suspect – and more likely wants to ignore them. 

Rittenhouse’s main sin in the eyes of the left - now that he has been acquitted - was that he carried an AR15, the infamous “Assault Weapon”.  A question for all you gun owners: if you were unarmed, would you attack someone holding an AR 15?  Of course not!  You could get killed!  No one in the media has brought up that Rittenhouse’s attackers must have had a death wish.  (Actually, one of the persons killed had just been discharged from a hospital after a suicide attempt.)

But wait, one of those killed did hit Rittenhouse with a skateboard.  How smart is it to bring a skateboard to a gun fight?

The third guy shot, Gaige Grosskreutz, was armed with a handgun.  Another question: would you go up against an AR15 while you were only armed with a handgun?  I’ll bet “Lefty” Grosskreutz has some newfound insight into that question.

One guy jumped over Rittenhouse while trying to kick him.  Kyle took a shot at the jumper while stretched out over him, and missed.  Had he not missed, that wound would have been interesting.     

Unarmed, would you bravely take on someone holding and AR15 to save others?  Perhaps.  But that rationale “doesn’t hold much water” in this case.  How much protection did the crowd need from someone running away from them?  If the crowd was really worried about their own safety, they could have just stopped chasing the guy armed with an AR15.

The media accuses Rittenhouse of being a vigilante.  Do vigilantes run away from the people they want to kill?

Then there is the prosecuting D.A. who pointed the AR15 at the jury with his finger on the trigger.  Picture yourself sitting in the jury box when he pointed the gun at you:  what would you have done?  What would you have had to say to the D.A.?  Obviously, he was a graduate of the Alec Baldwin school of gun safety.

The media questions why Rittenhouse had to travel 19 miles to get from his house to Kenosha but doesn’t ask why Grosskreutz traveled 42 miles to get to Kenosha.

When all else fails, the Left charges racism and that Kyle is a white supremacist.  You might reasonably respond, “But Rittenhouse and the three people he shot were all white”?  Not to be outflanked, the Left says it is the judicial system that is racist.  (Democrat Representative Cori Bush, a Black Lives Matter activist claimed, with no evidence, that the judge, jury and defendant were all white supremacists.) 

But Bush and that same Left ignores the virtually simultaneous trial of Andrew Coffey IV, a black man who was acquitted of murder and attempted murder by reason of self-defense.  Coffey shot at sheriffs during a drug raid on Coffey’s house during which Coffey’s girlfriend was killed.  (The raid was based on “drug complaints and sales” and police found crack cocaine and marijuana, so there is no issue of a mistaken raid.)  Coffey is a four (4) time convicted felon and it was illegal for him to possess the .45 caliber handgun he used.  He was convicted on the charge of a felon possessing a firearm.  (Wow, that was a tough decision!) 

A black, convicted felon, claims self-defense for using an illegal firearm to shoot at a sheriff’s deputy, who was serving a legal warrant, and the “racist” judicial system finds him innocent.  Cori Bush and the media find nothing worth commenting on there.  But according to Bush and the media, a white shooting three other whites is racism and white supremacy.       

Rittenhouse’s verdict says that we have the right to protect ourselves from mob violence.  Coffey’s verdict says that we have the right to protect ourselves from government violence.

How did the media describe the three people shot by Rittenhouse?

Anthony Huber was “a happy and laid-back guy…a really sweet person…always had a smile on his face.”  The leftist media usually omitted any reference to his also having convictions for strangulation and suffocation and false imprisonment in a domestic abuse case. 

Gaige Grosskreutz was variously described as a part of a social justice group, a volunteer medic at Black Lives Matter protests and a senior at Northland College.  Not mentioned is that he has a record of criminal arrests going back to 2010, a juvenile record that is sealed and other charges currently pending. There was never a mention of Grosskreutz carrying a concealed firearm without a valid concealed carry permit, to which he testified had expired.

At the time of the incident, Joseph Rosenbaum was pending charges in Wisconsin for domestic abuse and jumping bail. He was convicted in Arizona in 2002 for child molestation charges, for which he was sentenced to 14 years in prison.  Mercifully, the media couldn’t find anything nice to say about him but, in many cases, they couldn’t find anything bad worth telling the public about, either.

None of them were accused by the media (and Joe Biden) of being racists and white supremacists even though there was as much evidence proving they were racists and white supremacists as there was proving Kyle Rittenhouse was a racist and white supremacist.