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.

Hidden Agendas  by Tom Reynolds

NY City radical lefties (but I repeat myself) are removing a statue of Thomas Jefferson from city hall.  It’s not hard to figure out why the left hates Jefferson.  He wrote: “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

Jefferson was also the primary author of the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, which said: “…all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion…”  Since the left believes the only religion is their politics, they are greatly offended by Jefferson’s beliefs.

Jefferson also wrote: "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."  I wonder how Jefferson would react to the FBI investigating parents as domestic terrorists if they speak out at school board meetings.  (By-the-way, the FBI is not investigating New York City-based Black Lives Matter leader Hawk Newsome  who met with Mayor-elect Eric Adams and afterwards vowed "riots," "fire," and "bloodshed" if Adams does not meet BLM’s demands.)

Oh yeah, and then there is the issue of Jefferson being the primary author of the Declaration of Independence, which established the United States of America.  Nothing is more offensive to a radical leftist’s sensibilities than the USA.

Of course, none of the leftists think they are radical.  They think believing in the U.S. Constitution is radical. They’re right!  It puts the people and not the government in charge.

The left also wants to remove Andrew Jackson from the $20 bill.  What might be their hidden agendas there? 

Jackson was the last president to pay off the national debt; when he left office, the national debt was $0. Jackson also said: “I am one of those who do not believe that a national debt is a national blessing, but rather a curse to a republic…”.  Since the current national debt is over $28 Trillion.  Jackson’s example is not one the left wants to see honored.

The social media giants can’t be happy about this Jackson quote: “Unless you…check the spirit of monopoly and thirst for exclusive privileges you will in the end find that... the control over your dearest interests has passed into the hands of these corporations”.

Jackson was also against higher taxation, which put him in opposition to one of the Holy Grails of current leftists.  “Every diminution of the public burdens arising from taxation gives to individual enterprise increased power…”   

Nancy Pelosi led the effort to disenfranchise Jackson from the $20.  Could Jackson have anticipated her and her House when he said: “I weep for the liberty of my country when I see…that corruption has been imputed to many members of the House of Representatives, and the rights of the people have been bartered for promises of office”.

The left is never a fan of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.  Might his statement on New York’s restrictive gun laws have contributed to their being triggered?  “There is the right to self-defense for celebrities and state judges and retired police officers, but pretty much not for the ordinary kind of people who have a real, felt need to carry a gun to protect themselves.”(The left feels the same way about firearms as they do about wealth.  It’s okay for them but not for us.) 

William Barr was an enemy of the left for two reasons: he was Donald Trump’s Attorney General and in 2019 he said "…the so-called progressives treat politics as their religion. Their holy mission is to use the coercive power of the State to remake man and society in their own image, according to an abstract ideal of perfection. Whatever means they use are therefore justified because, by definition, they are a virtuous people pursing a deific end”.  Jefferson, Jackson and Alito would certainly agree with Barr.

Lots of reasons and excuses are given why the left-wing media lied about Kyle Rittenhouse.  But the real reason was that he showed the world why someone would need an AR15 with 30 rounds.

On the other hand, our forefathers had never kept a hidden agenda about their motives.  In his book, The Indispensables, Patrick O’Donnell writes of an interview with Captain Levi Preston, a Revolutionary War veteran.  It sheds light on why Americans fought and what it means to be an American.

Was it about the Stamp Act?

Preston: ‘I never saw one of those stamps.’

Was it about the Tea Tax?

Preston: ‘I never drank a drop of that stuff; the boys threw it all overboard.’

Preston: ‘What we meant in going for those red-coats was this: we always had governed ourselves and we always meant to.’

Remember that, as Americans: “we always had governed ourselves and we always meant to”.  Words to chill the heart of every leftist politician.

Words to give us another reason to be thankful on Thursday.

Happy Thanksgiving!

The Soviet Union is Alive at Cornell and in Washington D.C.  by Tom Reynolds

Indisputably, Joe Biden has surrounded himself with some of the worst people of any administration in American history.  If you doubt it, start with his choice for Vice President.  Then go to his nomination of David Chipman to head BATFE.  His appointments are all meant to push his failed far left agenda, which includes eliminating all firearms from civilian possession.  That his programs have been failures doesn’t stop him from now doubling down.  And if he can’t destroy the 2^nd Amendment directly, he’ll do it indirectly.

If you thought David Chipman was bad, Biden’s nomination for Comptroller of the Currency, Saule Omarova, is worse than Chipman.  She was born in the Soviet Union, got her college degree from Moscow University and now teaches in Cornell University’s Law School.  If you knew nothing else about her, that alone should scare you.  Not the Soviet Union part – the Cornell University part.

Well, yes, the Soviet Union part should scare you, too.  Can there be any remaining doubt that Joe Biden’s Democrat Party is now a Socialist Party?

The Comptroller of the Currency’s job (from its web page) is: “Ensuring a safe and sound banking system for all Americans”.  Why is this nomination important to gun owners?  Stick with me while we peel back the layers of the onion and you start crying.

She wrote a law review article which gives a strong indication of what she thinks is a “safe and sound banking system”.  She writes that she would like to see all bank deposits forcibly transferred to the Federal Reserve. This would wipe out most American banks because they are dependent upon deposits. Per Breitbart, “Community banks, which are most dependent on deposit funding, would be vaporized. Wall Street's biggest firms…would simply dissolve their bank arms”.

The Fed would become the main source of credit in the United States. The average citizen would have no other source of credit for mortgages, car loans and credit card purchases, other than the Fed.  Centralized power; government control of credit. 

How would this affect the 2^nd Amendment?  Under Omarova's scheme, the Fed would make credit decisions based on whether bureaucrats decided the loans served a "public purpose."  Conform to the left’s agenda or risk being found lacking when it comes to having a “public purpose”. Guess how the bureaucrats in the Washington swamp will feel about credit for gun manufacturers and gun owners?   

Shutting off sources of credit has already been tried as a way to attack the gun industry.  In March, Citibank announced a company-wide policy impacting small businesses, clients, and credit card partners nationwide.  It required them to not sell firearms unless they met the bank’s conditions and prohibiting them from selling bump stocks and high-capacity magazines.  In April, Bank of America announced that it will no longer finance companies that manufacture “military-style firearms for civilian use.”  Thankfully, the state of Louisiana made these banks back down by excluding them from underwriting Louisiana state bonds (a very lucrative business for these banks).  But these prior efforts will be like a .22 as compared to Omarova’s .50 caliber industry killer. 

The world runs on credit.  Many people buy guns and ammo using their personal credit cards.  Almost every corporation – including gun and ammo manufacturers - need credit to exist.  And you may have noticed the USA has borrowed $28 Trillion.  The Federal Reserve will become the world’s biggest source of credit.  And the world’s biggest source of denying credit.

Remember how the Biden administration has been punishing those that resist getting Covid vaccinations?  No jab, no job.  Think about the Biden administration having control of all credit.  For example, gun makers, fossil fuel companies and right-of-center websites would likely be denied credit as not serving the “public purpose” and, therefore, undeserving of credit.  Lost jobs mean nothing to the left in their pursuit of absolute power.      

There is a danger beyond just that to the 2^nd Amendment.  One source would make almost every credit decision.  Any mistakes would become universal errors spread throughout the economy. Think 2008, but everything fails all at once because there's just one big bank run by government bureaucrats.  Doubt it?  Read up on the Community Reinvestment Act.

The Federal Reserve was established to be independent of politics. Do you believe the political branches of government would be content to let control of the economy be dominated by Federal Reserve presidents?

SCOPE usually asks gun owners to write their legislators in opposition to proposed gun laws.  But the nomination of Saule Omarova to be the Comptroller of the Currency deserves your attention.  We defeated Chipman and this is a chance to demonstrate that Biden cannot continue to nominate these radical socialists to destroy America and, with it, the 2^nd Amendment.

STRAIGHT TALK – Our Second Amendment Rights & Freedoms  by Richard Rossi

Some facts that will never see daylight in our National News Media or Social Network sites.

United States Court of Appeals – Fourth Circuit district.

Ruled that 18-to-20-year old’s have the same Second Amendment rights to purchase handguns as older Americans do. Judge Julie Richardson wrote; “when do Constitutional rights vest? Our nation’s most cherished constitutional rights vest no later than 18. And the 2^nd Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms is no different”
Despite the anti-gun advocates claim that violence will rise with gun sales. The study by the Journal of Injury Epidemiology, could not find a link existed. “Results suggest much of the rise in firearm violence during our study period was attributed to other factors, indicating a need for additional research.”
This year America has added five additional (Iowa, Montana, Tennessee, Texas and Utah) states to the list of states that have Constitutional Carry laws.  Actual 5 new states in one year is quite a remarkable feat. What caused the number of “permitless” carry states to jump by nearly ‘one-third in a single year? It is and was the Democratic majority in Congress and Joe Biden in the White House pushing their agenda and anti-gun schemes to strip Americans of their Second Amendment Rights.
Our country has added 8.3 million new gun owners even in this plague ridden 2020. According to the NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation), another 3.2 million decided to exercise their 2^nd Amendment right for the first time in 2021.  This data was derived from a nationwide survey of firearms retailers conducted by the NSSF.  Responses indicated 33.2% of customers, or 3,247,351, purchased a firearm for the very first time in that six-month period.
Even though many studies have proven that “Gun Buybacks” don’t reduce violent crime or suicides, Santa Barbara District Attorney Joyce Dudley recently decided to make up some facts of her own when promoting a local “buyback“.  She stated: “In fact, data suggests that buybacks have led to a drop in firearm suicide rates of almost 80 percent.”   Of course, Dudley’s claim is false.   In a recent National Bureau of Economics study, it concluded, “We find no evidence that Gun Buyback Programs reduce suicides or homicides where a firearm was involved.”  Anti-gunners are willing to make up facts when it could help their cause and no one holds them responsible in our News Media.
Whose life is worth saving, anyway?  Some politicians just don’t get it, and gun-ban-loving U.S. Representative Cori Bush, D-Missouri, is at the top of the list. Not only is she anti-Second Amendment but she is also for ‘DEFUNDING POLICE”.  However, she has no problem what-so-ever in having an armed detail of bodyguards following her around.  She ranted on CNN “You would rather me die?” when she was called-out for her stance. How ironic that her life is worth more than your or your family members.  The average Law-abiding citizen does not have the luxury of hiring a bodyguard detail to keep them safe. She can’t fathom our need to protect ourselves as provided by our Second Amendment.

Federal Court Overturns Draconian Under 21 Handgun Ban – Personal Defense World

Study: High Gun Sales Didn’t Cause Rise in Violence.|

Anti-Gun Researchers Find Rising Violence NOT Linked to High Gun Sales – Personal Defense World

Record Year for Constitutional Carry.

Constitutional Carry Bills Moving Forward in Numerous States – Personal Defense World

Meteoric Rise of NEW Gun Owners Continues.

Gun Sales Figures Continue to Outpace Pre-Covid Numbers – Personal Defense World

Anti-Gunners Keep Spreading Lies

Gun Buybacks: Anti-Gun Policy That Continues to Misfire – Personal Defense World

Guns For My Bodyguards, But None For You!

The Ugly Truth About Gun Control: Why Your Life Isn’t Worth Saving – Personal Defense World

Advice from the media  by Tom Reynolds

Since last week’s election, the media has been full of…advice…on what Republicans should do to win the next election.  Some might say that Republicans taking advice from the media is like Custer taking advice from the Indians.

The most repeated advice is for candidates to distance oneself from Donald Trump.  Over 74 million people voted for Trump and he continues to draw overflow crowds to his rallies but the left- wing media says that he is political poison.  This is much like the advice Yogi Berra gave when he said, “Nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded.”

The same media has tried to explain away why gun purchases have been setting new records.  Rarely mentioned as a reason to buy a gun are the riots which enveloped major cities most of last year.  But that’s understandable since that same media labelled them “peaceful protests”: why would someone need a gun to defend themselves against peaceful protestors?  If there was arson, looting and murders, that would cause people to want to arm themselves, but not peaceful protests.  Could voters have been turned off by Democrat mayors and governors not being willing to protect lives and property?

And the “Defund the police” movement has hasn’t done very well in elections for reasons similar to the above.  Democrats believe citizens don’t need police or guns to defend themselves against peaceful protestors.  (But it wasn’t unnoticed that those same politicians increased their personal protection, at the same time, since their lives are more valuable than ours.)  Apparently, someone was not peacefully protesting in Kenosha since Gaige Grosskruetz, who was shot by Kyle Rittenhouse during the Kenosha “peaceful protests”, is suing city and county officials in Kenosha for illegally deputizing a “roving militia” of “white nationalist vigilantes”.  When in doubt, cry racism, even if you are white. 

But the racism tactic is the property of the Democrat Party so the media can’t recommend that Republicans charge racism.  Labelling the party of the KKK, segregation and Jim Crow laws as racists just wouldn’t do.

Let’s suggest another overall tactic that is responsible for the “Red Wave” that seems to have swept over the country last week.  Could that wave have been due to the actions of the Democrat Party and had nothing to do with Republicans? 

Remember when the first 100 days of a President’s administration were a benchmark of a President’s success.  Did any Democrats campaign on the successes of the Biden / Harris administration during the 280 days prior to the election? 

Could inflation have had something to do with the election results?  Biden and his administration say inflation is only transitory and it is expected to slow down…next Fall.  And besides, they tout, if you subtract fuel and food, it isn’t bad.  (Just stay home and don’t eat until next Fall and you won’t notice it.) 

For defenders of the 2^nd Amendment, Biden nominated David Chipman to be the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives.  Why should 2A defenders not trust someone being paid by the anti-2A Gifford Foundation to head the agency controlling guns?  And 2A defenders might have noticed that anti-2A Merrick Garland is the Attorney General; but he wasn’t really a threat to 2A since he was spending his time investigating parents at school board meetings as domestic terrorists.  Perhaps Biden will revert to “Beto” O’Rourke as a gun czar to save his gun control dreams.

Speaking of parents, it probably didn’t help that the unsuccessful Democrat gubernatorial candidate in Virginia said, “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach”.  If politicians want to brainwash children with Critical Race Theory (CRT), how dare parents try to stand in their way.   Democrat candidates apparently believe that telling children that they and their parents are racists based solely on their skin color would be well received.  Of course, Democrats claim they aren’t teaching CRT but don’t want it banned.  Because banning would keep them from not teaching it?

Perhaps voters remembered the Chairman of the joint Chiefs of Staff saying "I've read Mao Zedong. I've read Karl Marx. I've read Lenin. That doesn't make me a communist.”  Apparently, reading Clausewitz or Sun Tzu doesn’t make one a general, either.  If instead of spending his time during the military’s “stand down to study institutional racism”, perhaps he should have used that time to study…oh I don’t know…maybe…the plans for withdrawing from Afghanistan.  Would that have changed voters’ perception of the Biden administration’s competence?

Voters may also have been concerned about the potential lack of goods in stores.  A major backlog in the port of Los Angeles created negative publicity just before the election.  Joe Biden didn’t help by implementing policies that dockworkers work longer hours unloading ships, when the core problem was a lack of trucks to move the cargo, once it was unloaded.  (The trucks are in short supply because of California’s environmental laws, but those are sacred texts to the left so they can’t be touched.)  Then, Joe wanted to fine the ships for not unloading their cargo, as if it was their fault to be stacked up 100 deep waiting to be unloaded. 

We could mention the crises at the southern border but, not to worry, Kamala Harris is taking charge.  Actually, she took charge back in the Spring, in case you didn’t notice.

And did anyone notice that the Secretary of Transportation took two months off as the supply crises deepened?  Was that job listed as essential during the China Virus shutdown?

Could all of the above have led to the spanking that Democrats got on election day?  If it did, the Democrats believe their problem was not doing enough so, instead of changing tactics, they are doubling down.  Which leaves Republicans in the position of just letting it happen or fighting a losing battle and letting it happen.

Election Fraud  by Tom Reynolds

On last Monday we wrote about the real dangers of election fraud and cited several issues which surfaced in the Maricopa County Arizona Audit.  On Tuesday, New York voters rejected three proposed amendments to the New York Constitution; two of which, had they been approved, were open invitations to voter fraud.  Another case has surfaced which demonstrates that voter fraud is a real issue (an “existential” issue as the talking heads on TV like to say.)

Hans von Spakovsky wrote in the Heritage Foundation that the acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, has filed four counts against Marie Beren.   Charges include voting more than once in a federal election, conspiring to illegally vote in a federal election and to deprive persons of their civil rights, and aiding and abetting the submission of fraudulent ballots. The latter has wide spread implications.

Beren was an official “election judge” responsible for overseeing and managing three different polling places inside the 39^th Ward in Philadelphia.  She served for 27 years (from 1988 to 2015). She officially stepped down in 2015 but according to the criminal information supplied von Spakovsky, Beren still ran all three Divisions from behind the scenes through 2019. 

According to the Justice Department, Consultant #1 would give Beren directions to add fraudulent votes to candidates supported by Consultant #1. Beren would then “cast fraudulent votes” in her polling places“ on behalf of voters she knew would not physically appear at the polls.” 

Beren would also give Consultant #1 reports on how many “legit votes” had been cast as Election Day was progressing.  To avoid suspicion, if legitimate turnout was high she cast fewer fraudulent votes than if the turnout was low,

Consultant #1 would also tell Beren to “shift her efforts from one of Consultant #1’s preferred candidates to another,” depending on how voting was going during the day.

Beren would “also permit and encourage individual voters … to cast ballots” for absent family members and would tell them which candidates to vote for.  She is alleged to have submitted falsified registration lists as to who had actually appeared at the polling places, to cover the absent voters. 

This election fraud scheme is said to have been carried out in both primary and general elections and involved local, state, and federal candidates. As von Spakovsky accurately put it, “No wonder Philadelphia officials were so hostile to poll watchers in last year’s election”.

Consultant #1 is not identified, but Von Spakovsky alleges it is Michael “Ozzie” Myers, a political consultant and former congressman who is currently indicted for other voter crimes in support of Democrats and has a past conviction for bribery - while he was in Congress.  (Remember ABSCAM?)  The case against Myers is still pending. 

In a similar case, the Philadelphia Enquirer reported that another Philadelphia election official, Domenick Demuro, plead guilty to accepting thousands of dollars in bribes to artificially increase the vote totals for multiple Democratic candidates.  He “admitted that a local political consultant gave him directions and paid him money to add votes for candidates supported by the consultant”.

One election official is accused and another has plead guilty to multiple counts of election fraud in local, state and federal elections.  An unnamed “Consultant #1” was involved with both.  And these are the ones who were caught!  Like the Swamp in Washington D.C., we don’t yet know how wide and how deep this goes but, in some past presidential elections there were no / zero / zilch votes cast for the Republican candidate in some Philadelphia election districts. 

Thankfully, the voters in New York shut down two avenues for corruption but, rest assured, certain politicians and their supporters will work tirelessly to open up new paths for voter fraud and corruption while the left-wing media gives them cover.

NYSRPA versus Bruen  by Tom Reynolds

On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard the 2^nd Amendment case called NYS Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.  (Bruen is the Superintendent of the NY State Police.)  This was the first major SCOTUS case since the Heller & McDonald cases, a decade ago.

Always looking for a way to neuter 2A, the left is trying to infringe on the right to carry “outside the home”.  Heller & McDonald didn’t specifically include “outside the home”; bearing arms outside the home would only be done by a government authority, if left up to the New York government.    

If you surf the web for this case and look at the usual leftist web sites, which are by nature anti-2A, most of them are conceding that they will lose this case.  Some were conceding even before the case was heard.  That’s encouraging but seems premature since SCOTUS has been known to surprise and Chief Justice Roberts, in particular, is a wild card.  The left has been known to find additional votes in the middle of the night.

In NYSRPA v. Bruen, there is a strong constitutional argument against NY State law and SCOTUS now consists of five justices with strong 2A credentials - and possibly six if Roberts goes along. It’s expected that the three liberal justices will blindly vote against NYSRPA no matter what facts are put forth.

NY is a “show cause” state and many NY counties – and especially NY City – force the citizen to prove they have a need-to-carry a handgun and apply a very high bar to the ordinary citizen demonstrating that they having that need.  Most states reverse that and in those it is the state that has to “show cause” why the citizen does not have a need-to-carry; and there is a low bar to establishing need. 

In presenting their case, New York State’s attorneys showed their true liberal base as they almost completely ignored the question of the constitutionality of the law and just wanted to deal with the social consequences the law – as they saw the consequences, of course.  They spoke of social issues, which would seem to concede that NY law was unconstitutional.  That approach ignores that we are a nation of laws and if a law’s social consequences are deemed to be negative by enough citizens, there are legal ways to replace it.  Judges do not have the right to legislate, under the Constitution, but that doesn’t stop liberal judges.  The left knows that they can’t replace the 2^nd Amendment so they frequently make a desperate appeal to the social aspects. 

The NY State attorneys tried to make the point that gun control has a long history in the United States, going back to the 1800’s.  Black Public Defenders had previously obliterated this argument in their amicus brief but that doesn’t stop the left from out-of-context characterizations.  Many of the laws in the 1800’s were used to prevent freed blacks from “keeping and bearing arms” in the South.  In essence, NY State was using racist Jim Crow laws to justify current gun control. 

The NY State attorneys seemed to put their hopes on SCOTUS not issuing a decision but sending it back to lower courts for further hearing.  That’s a delaying tactic to drag out the case and hope for a change in the makeup of SCOTUS, if the case comes back to SCOTUS.  Remember, the left also wants to pack SCOTUS with enough new liberal justices to create an anti-2A majority, so a delay keeps their hopes alive for a decision that ignores the Constitution  

The left has another hope in that SCOTUS will issue a very narrow ruling.  This might save anti-2A laws in other states or allow some high level of gun control to remain in force.  For instance, a narrow ruling might allow wide government discretion in designating places as “sensitive places” or “gun free zones”.  Remember what happened with wide government discretion over designating “essential” businesses that stayed open during the China Virus lockdowns. 

The positions presented by NYS before SCOTUS reflect similar efforts by the left on other issues.  The left hopes that people (and judges) will not use logic.  For instance, NY State’s attorneys pointed out that seven states have similar laws to New York, hoping that justices can’t do basic math or are not aware that the USA consists of 50 states and, therefore, 42 states do not have these unconstitutional laws. 

As usual, the left tried to pit one group of citizens against another.  In this case it was urban versus rural Americans.  NY’s attorneys talked about local discretion and how rural commuters might have a greater need for bearing arms outside the home.  (One liberal web site made fun of the idea that there was much crime on NY Subways.)  NY Attorneys were appalled at the idea of a crowd of people carrying.

Let’s hope that the commentators and pundits on both sides are correct and SCOTUS finds for NYSRPA and against New York State.  Of course, it’s your taxpayer dollars that are financing the legal effort to take away your 2^nd Amendment rights.

The CDC and Gun Violence Research  by Tom Reynolds Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) partners with SCOPE on a number of things. DRGO’s column on the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the CDC’s new director’s efforts is extremely worthwhile for SCOPE members.  Restoring confidence in the CDC after their flip-flops over the China Virus is a big task and Rochelle Walensky does not make it easier by her unfounded war on guns.  The left would like people to believe that the CDC was barred by Congress from gun violence research but, in fact, it was only barred from advocating for gun control.  As a result, the CDC took the position that: if they could not use research to advocate for gun control, what’s the use of doing research. The following is a reprint of DRGO’s column that destroys the myths on the CDC and gun research.

The CDC’s Forever War on Gun Owners Posted on October 26, 2021 by DRGO (Photo from NYTimes.com) [Ed: This is the full text of the piece Drs. Faria & Wheeler published in the Washington Examiner September 9.] Twenty-five years ago, Congress reprimanded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for its political advocacy of gun control. Now, President Joe Biden’s CDC Director Rochelle Walensky is planning a new round of activism against gun owners. In an emotive video interview with CNN’s Elizabeth Cohen, Walensky recently signaled her intention to resume CDC research on “America’s epidemic of gun violence.” Since the CDC’s 1990s activism, consequential shifts in science, public opinion, and law have transformed the firearms debate. Firearm homicides are a fraction of what they were then. Mountains of criminology research and law enforcement experience have shown firearm carry license holders to be exceedingly responsible. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that gun ownership is an individual right. Walensky ignores it all, repeating tired tropes about “gun violence” and implicitly conflating average gun owners with chronically violent criminals. We testified before the House Appropriations Committee in March 1996, at the height of the controversy. The public health community had just launched its campaign to portray firearms as “dirty, deadly, and banned,” as top CDC official Mark Rosenberg put it. President Bill Clinton’s Surgeon General David Satcher used his bully pulpit to rail at the National Rifle Association. In the CNN video, interviewer Cohen alleges that the NRA, in the 1990s, “convinced Congress to cut funding for all gun research.” That myth has been the narrative of the public health community ever since. In reality, Congress only put a stop to the CDC’s “activities to advocate or promote gun control,” as the full House Appropriations Committee report put it. And what were those activities? Along with two other witnesses, we laid the evidence out for the Appropriations Committee: 1) A CDC-funded 1993 New England Journal of Medicine article by Dr. Arthur Kellermann and co-authors. They used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool, to claim that having a gun in the home triples the risk of becoming a homicide victim. The sample population was a group of crime-prone urban residents who had been murdered in their homes. The authors then tried to equate this wildly unrepresentative group with typical gun owners. 2) The winter 1993 CDC publication “Public Health Policy for Preventing Violence,” co-authored by Rosenberg. It offered two strategies for preventing firearm injuries: “restrictive licensing (for example, only police, military, guards, and so on)” and “prohibit gun ownership.” 3) Shockingly frank admissions made on the record by CDC officials, describing their clear anti-gun political agenda. “We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities,” said P.W. O’Carroll, acting section head of the Division of Injury Control, CDC, in “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation” in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1989. 4) A CDC-funded newsletter from the Trauma Foundation, a San Francisco-based gun prohibition advocacy group. The newsletter urged readers to “organize a picket at gun manufacturing sites” and to “work for campaign finance reform to weaken the gun lobby’s political clout.” And now, after all that, the CDC director wants gun owners to believe her invitation to “have a conversation” and “come to the table” to “be part of the solution.” Nowhere does Walensky even hint that she has actually reached out to the National Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, or Gun Owners of America. For decades, the CDC has quietly expanded its activities from its original critical mission of infectious disease control. The agency now supports far-afield research projects in spousal abuse, juvenile delinquency, and other subjects far better explored by criminologists and sociologists. Our CDC director seems to think that now, even as we struggle with the most lethal pandemic in a century, is a good time to once again direct the agency’s resources against gun owners. The public is not likely to agree.

Voter Fraud  by Tom Reynolds

Less than ten years ago, the Democrat Party was in the minority in the NYS Senate.  They were afraid that the majority Republican Party would use their power in redistricting after the 2020 census, so the Democrats agreed to back a constitutional amendment aimed at preventing the majority party from abusing their redistricting ability.  Then, to their surprise, the Democrats won the majority in the Senate and they now want to change that amendment, before it is ever used, so that the majority party can abuse redistricting. 

Not stopping with just redistricting, the Democrats want to further their environmentalist and accessibility credentials by creating an environment where voter fraud and cheating and abuse of power are much more accessible to the average politician.

Three of the five proposals on the back of Tuesday’s ballot have to do with voting and redistricting.  Proposal One would create a redistricting scenario that would allow the Democrat Party to be forever in power.  Proposal Three and Four would facilitate fraud and cheating through relaxed voter registration and absentee ballot requirements.

But, but, but…the Left and its media partners claim there is no voter fraud.  Perhaps we should look closer at Arizona to see if that claim holds any water.

The Maricopa County Arizona audit is important because Joe Biden won Maricopa County by 45,000 votes but he only won the entire state by 10,500 votes.  Obviously, Maricopa County was the key to his win.  If there was sufficient voter fraud, the Electoral College certification of Biden, in Arizona, was wrong.  (It would still stand.)  And if Arizona was wrong, could it have happened in other states?

After the Maricopa County Arizona audit, the leftist media published that the vote counts barely changed; anyone claiming there was fraud (like Donald Trump, for instance) were labelled as “falsely claiming” there was fraud.  But the devil-is-in-the-details, which tell a completely different story - that the Left ignores.

Here are some of the key audit findings:

• 23,344 mail-in ballots by people who moved before 10/5/20. Mailed ballots are not forwardable per election law.  
• 2,382 in-person voters had moved out of Maricopa County prior to 10/5/2020.”  
• Note: Voters who moved out of Maricopa County between 10/5/20 and 11/3/20 were still legally entitled to vote in the presidential election.  The above two categories moved out before 10/5/20 and were ineligible for presidential elections.  But somehow, they voted.
• 9,041 more ballots returned by voters than were sent to voters;
• 5,295 voters with the same first, middle and last name and the same birth date voted in two different Arizona counties;
• 2,592 more duplicates than original ballots”.  (Note: A duplicate ballot was created because of a problem with the original ballot that could be cured with a duplicate ballot);
• 1,551 more votes cast than voters.  (Note: Votes cast would be expected to be less- not more - than voters since voters do not always vote in every election on the ballot.)
• 282 individuals who were deceased prior to 10/5/20 voted in the election.

Numerous other problems are listed, such as voters whose ballots were counted despite the fact that they registered to vote after the state deadline for registration had already passed.

Maricopa election officials provided simplistic explanations and the leftist media parroted the Maricopa explanations as “nothing to see here”.  Instead, the leftist media were able to claim that the election results remained almost the same.  (Note: In a secret ballot and there is no way to tell for who got the illegitimate votes.)  It seemed as if there would be no follow up to the issues raised by the audit even though there appear to be potential crimes.  (Note: the FBI is probably too busy investigating parents at school board meetings to worry about voter fraud.)

Then, this past Friday:

According to Arizona Senate President Karen Fann, Arizona’s Attorney General Mark Brnovich has opened a “formal investigation” into any misconduct by Maricopa County election officials.  This decision comes following the revelations found in Arizona’s independent election audit.  Fann said, “Some of that report is inconclusive…And the reason why it is inconclusive is because Maricopa County did not turn over the routers, did not (turn) over the splunk logs. They have now admitted before Congress that they deleted files the day before everything was supposed to be turned in and over to us.”  Before Congress, they said that they had to delete them to make room for an upcoming election. But Fann continued, “Congressmen then pointed out that there were still elections on the server from previous – before 2020 - and they couldn’t explain why that was.”  When they said, “don’t worry, the deleted files are on a backup archive”, Congressman Biggs asked “did you turn that over to the auditors in the Senate”?  They said, “well, no, they didn’t subpoena our backup archives.” 

By the way, in covering this issue, the leftist media fact checkers labelled as false that Maricopa officials deleted the information and fact checkers explained that it is on backup drives; omitting that Maricopa isn’t turning them over and omitting that there was no need to delete it to make space.

“I mean, you don’t hold information from the voters and the constituents and just think you are going to get away with it,” Fann said.

Obviously, Fann isn’t familiar with New York State. 

And then there is Proposal Two that disguises a political power grab behind words about clean water, air and a healthful environment.  Approving this Amendment would give the left one more hammer with which to hit the 2^nd Amendment or anything else they oppose.  They are already trying to ban lead ammunition and a constitutional amendment gives them one more weapon.

2A supporters are hopeful the Supreme Court will give us a victory this year but this election is an attempt to snatch defeat from victory.  Off year elections, such as this one, generally do not get much turnout.  It’s vital that 2A supporters rouse themselves, and their fellow 2A supporters, to vote.