Kamala Harris And Tim Walz Really Don’t Like The Second Amendment

Daily Caller The first ten amendments to our Constitution are known as the “Bill of Rights” for a reason — within it are denoted numerous “rights” that belong to individuals and which are guaranteed as such against government limitation. Any American elected official who fails to grasp this foundational principle, or who understands it but refuses to accept it, is undeserving of holding public office. Take, for example, Kamala Harris. Our current vice president, the Democrat Party nominee for president, is on record positing that one of those fundamental individual liberties expressly guaranteed against government intrusion, does not actually protect an individual right after all. So much for the clear language and history underpinning the Bill of Rights. Not surprising, the context in which Harris has taken such a posture openly antithetical to the very principle on which the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791 is the Second Amendment guaranteeing the right to keep and bear arms. She proudly lent her name as the then-district attorney for San Francisco, to a legal brief opposing what turned out to be the seminal 2008 Heller decision that declared expressly that the Second Amendment does in fact protect an individual right to possess a firearm. Harris’ stance set forth in that legal brief tells us all we need to know about her disdain for the Second Amendment. In the years since Heller, Harris has continued to support all manner of government restrictions on possession of firearms by law-abiding citizens, including among other measures, confiscatory bans on the country’s most popular rifle the AR-15, lauding Australia’s draconian gun confiscation program and most recently, criticizing the Supreme Court’s Cargill decision in June that stopped the ATF...

Accountability? Nope. Nothing To See Here, Folks

Daily Caller On Monday, Kimberly Cheatle, the now-former Director of the U.S. Secret Service, “testified” (I use the term loosely) publicly before the House Committee on Homeland Security.  Unsurprisingly (to me, at least), the lengthy session produced not a shred of evidence not previously known to the public. The only surprise at the end of the day was that some members of the committee actually appear to have expected otherwise. At least some members of the Committee on both sides of the aisle seem to be unfamiliar with one of the foundational principles on which governments (including our own) operate:  bureaucracies are designed and operate in such a way as to avoid accountability. This is hardly breaking news. The National Academy of Public Service has published extensively about the “culture of unaccountability that hampers the government’s operations.” Congress has considered “reviving” the Constitution’s Appointments Clause to force presidential appointments to be more accountable. Yet the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years has tightened – not relaxed — standing requirements that must be met in order to hold government officials accountable by court action. I learned this lesson in unaccountability in 1995, during my first term in the House. Nothing I have seen since has changed my opinion about government aversion to accountability. The context in which the immutability of government un-accountability came clear to me was the series of hearings in which I participated in Spring 1995 to investigate the tragedy two years prior at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas; a tragedy of horrendous proportions during which four federal law enforcement officers and more than 70 civilian...

Surgeon General Salutes And Joins Biden’s Gun Control Brigade

Daily Caller It has been two weeks since U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued a public health advisory on what he declares to be the latest “public health crisis” in America.  An “Advisory” issued by the Surgeon General is supposed to be employed when, in the learned opinion of that official, the American people must be made aware that they face an urgent public health issue, in other words, an “emergency.”  Unlike his predecessors, who employed the bully pulpit of their office to crusade against arguably public health-related issues such as smoking and AIDS, Murthy’s June 25th “Surgeon General’s Advisory” has nothing to do with any reasoned or common sense definition of health. It does, however, have everything to do with politics; in this case, the one policy issue liberals invariably turn to as a way to rally their base — gun control.  Murthy dutifully declares “firearm violence” the latest and most urgent “public health crisis” facing our country; not heart failure, not cancer, not obesity, but guns. In doing this, he cheapens the role and responsibility of the nation’s preeminent public health official. Much of the mainstream media was breathless in drawing attention to the Surgeon General’s call to action against the scourge of violence committed by individuals misusing firearms. CNN, for example, lauded Murthy at length for joining the gun control hallelujah chorus. MyChesCo called it a “Landmark Step.” The partisan, political perspective unsurprisingly reflected in CNN’s article praising Murthy’s gun-control missive was obvious in the video placed atop the opinion piece – a photograph not of the Surgeon General but a video of President Biden.  There has been little public discourse spawned by the firearms violence...

The Ark Of The Covenant Deserves Reverence And Respect, Especially Today

Daily Caller With days and weeks filled with law practice, political goings on, serving as President of the National Rifle Association, and other issues relating thereto, I find myself, like many of my colleagues, with little time for matters of the mind. I was, therefore, extremely grateful to a friend who last week invited me to a celebration in New York City for the unveiling of one of the most beautiful works of religious art I have ever seen – the Ark of the Covenant constructed as close as humanly possible to its biblical criteria and dimensions. Being able to view up close this astonishingly beautiful and gold-laden artifact was itself worth the visit to the Big Apple. It was, however, the speakers that made the evening event truly valuable. Many of the presenters, including a number of Rabbis and biblical scholars, amongst who was Christian Coalition founder and current chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Ralph Reed, were (at least in my experience) more inspiring and thought-provoking than any presentation or essay by a political leader in the modern era (with the possible exception of several speeches by Ronald Reagan, including his second inaugural address describing the “American Sound”). It was truly invigorating to step back from politics and controversies of the day and cogitate for those few hours on matters of import that far transcend such current events in importance to each of us as individuals as well as to our country. The closest in oratorical proximity to politics that figured into last Wednesday evening’s celebration came in the form of thanksgiving to the United States...

When It Comes To The Second Amendment, The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same

Daily Caller I recently returned from the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) 153rd annual meeting in Dallas, Texas, an event at which hundreds of retailers and manufacturers of firearms, firearms accessories, archery equipment and camping gear set up shop and attracted more than 72,000 visitors, including many families with children of all ages. As was the case at every NRA annual meeting I have attended since becoming a Board member in 1998, the overarching theme was safe and responsible use and ownership of firearms. On Monday, May 20th, immediately following the annual meeting and exhibit hall, I was elected by the 76-member Board of Directors to serve as NRA President for the 2024-25 year. I accepted this honor at a time of great challenge and opportunity for the NRA and its more than four million dues-paying members — also recognizing that every year is one of challenge and opportunity for the NRA. The fact is, when it comes to defending the Second Amendment (and indeed, all the rights guaranteed to us by our Bill of Rights), our opponents never sleep, and a win one day is guaranteed to be followed by another challenge the next. Thus it has been since the founding of our great nation.  Thankfully for freedom-loving and law-abiding citizens, just as our adversaries never sleep, neither does the NRA in confronting challenges in the legislative, legal and regulatory arenas. And, since the turn of this century, those challenges have come also from the United Nations and other international organizations. Here at home, the recent prosecution of former President Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg illustrates the manner by which...

Are Crossdressing And Gender Identity Mandates Reducing The Effectiveness Of Our Intelligence Community?

Daily Caller A recent FOIA request secured release of an article by an anonymous intelligence officer employed by the federal government’s Intelligence Community (IC), entitled “MY GENDER IDENTITY AND EXPRESSION MAKE ME A BETTER INTELLIGENCE OFFICER.” Central to the theme of this apparently serious article appearing in an official publication of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), was the unnamed male author’s predisposition to dress in women’s clothes in his workplace, including the wearing of brassieres and high heeled shoes — actions that he asserts have “sharpened [his] skills as an intelligence officer” and “made [him] a better colleague.” It would be easy to dismiss this crossdressing gobbledygook, published by Uncle Sam just one month ago, based on nothing more than its utterly nonsensical and bizarre thesis that an adult male donning high heels and a brassiere thereby gains knowledge sure to improve his analytical capabilities to assess foreign intelligence information. The crossdressing article, however, does not represent or reflect a more fundamental problem infecting our Intelligence Community’s ability to provide accurate, timely and substantive intelligence for policy makers. The far more dangerous document than the anonymous crossdresser’s silliness, is “Intelligence Community Directive 125,” issued on May 13, 2023, and titled, “Gender Identity and Inclusivity in the Intelligence Community.” It is this official directive from the most senior Intelligence Community official in our government that more broadly threatens to undermine the deadly serious business of gathering, analyzing and disseminating to policy makers sound foreign intelligence product. Directive 125 goes far beyond justifying one crossdresser’s sartorial preferences. It mandates the manner by which senior Intelligence Community leaders must be...