Discussion:
Hypocrite Alert: Gillibrand Admits She Never Truly Believed In The 2A
(too old to reply)
a425couple
2019-05-19 02:20:27 UTC
Permalink
from
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/05/18/flashback-remember-when-kirsten-gillibrand-was-progun-n2546525

Hypocrite Alert: Gillibrand Admits She Never Truly Believed In The 2A
Beth Baumann Beth Baumann | @eb454 |Posted: May 18, 2019 1:45 PM

Hypocrite Alert: Gillibrand Admits She Never Truly Believed In The 2A
Source: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Sen Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) recently came out with a proposal to "end
gun violence." In her plan, she called for the typical points
ant-gunners love to cling to. She wants to establish universal
background checks; create a federal law against trafficking guns;
reestablish an assault weapons ban; ban bump stocks (hello, that's
already been done) and "large-capacity" magazines.

From her website:
We need to end our gun violence epidemic.

Mass shootings and gun violence are a national crisis that threaten the
safety of our families and communities. We can’t accept repeated
tragedies and tens of thousands of deaths every year as normal, and we
can’t accept politicians choosing NRA money over Americans’ lives. We
need to pass universal background checks, stop gun trafficking, ban
assault rifles and close gun sale loopholes to make sure guns can’t get
into the hands of dangerous criminals, terrorists or domestic abusers.
Kirsten has fearlessly and consistently stood up for commonsense gun
safety and taken on the greed of the gun lobby in the Senate, earning
her a proud “F” rating from the NRA.

The Brady Campaign even promoted her plan:

Brady

@bradybuzz
***@SenGillibrand's plan —
1️⃣ universal background checks
2️⃣ federal law against trafficking guns
3️⃣ ban bump stocks, large magazines & assault weapons#EndGunViolence
https://washex.am/2vXwQIc

26
2:45 PM - May 13, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Kirsten Gillibrand-WEX-051119
Gillibrand calls for assault weapon and large magazine bans to combat
gun violence
WARNER, N.H. — Presidential candidate Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.,
said that she does not support creating a federal firearm licensing system.

washingtonexaminer.com
17 people are talking about this
But let's take a trip down memory, lane shall we?

---------------------------
Back in 2008, Gillibrand wrote a letter to Chris Cox, the Executive
Director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative
Action. In the letter, she positioned herself as a being pro-gun and
someone who wanted to work with the gun rights group.

"To begin with, I want to be very clear that I always have and always
will believe that the correct interpretation fo the 2nd amendment is
that it applies to an individual's right to carry guns, and does not
apply generally to the National Guard or a group of individuals in a
State," Gillibrand wrote.
-------------------------------

What's ironic is her so-called agenda are all things she previously said
she didn't believe in.

"On the question of outright banning certain firearms for cosmetic
features, bullets of an random size, or banning magazines holding an
arbitrary number of cartridges, I am adamantly opposed and do not
believe that laws should be based on random limits just for the sake of
limiting gun ownership or usage," she wrote. "Furthermore, the attempt
to limit the purchase of firearms to arbitrary time periods – such as
'one gun-a-month' – will not solve any crimes and will only curtain the
Constitutional rights of law abiding citizens. I share your concerns
about these and other attempts to that could contribute to the slippery
slope of government confiscation of people's firearms based on the
arbitrary whims of politics and public opinion."

Gillibrand also talked about how she submitted an amicus curae (friend
of the court) brief in favor of the Heller decision.

"...I was pleased that the Court correctly stood up for gun owners
throughout the District by striking down the unconstitutional firearms
restrictions," she wrote. She also cited a couple bills she sponsored
in the House, including The Second Amendment Enforcement Act and the
Tiahrt Amendment.

At the time the letter was written she had an "A" rating from the NRA.
Shortly after being elected to the Senate, her score quickly went to an
"F" because of her anti-gun voting record.

Now that she's being called out for her hypocrisy, the presidential
hopeful is spinning the policy shift as a "simple mistake." "I didn't
do the right thing," Gillibrand told CNN's Alisyn Camerota on "New Day"
Wednesday. "I mean, I think someone who can't recognize when they're
wrong is far more concerning if you can never admit when you're wrong.
And not only was I wrong, and not only should I have cared more about
gun violence in other parts of my state or other parts of my country, I
just didn't."

She said she plans to be "far more thoughtful about all issues,
regardless of whether it's an issue for my state or my district."

"I think that makes me a better candidate for president. I think it
makes me a better person, because if you don't have an ounce of humility
to know when you're wrong, how are you possibly going to govern all of
America?" she told Camerota.

"Ten years ago, when I became US senator, I recognized that I was only
focused on the needs of my upstate district, but I really should have
been focusing on the needs of everyone," Gillibrand concluded.

So one of two things happened here.

A) Gillibrand had no true thoughts or opinions on the issue and decided
to vote in line with gun rights advocates because she knew it'd make her
constituents happy. If that's the case, then she was successfully
representing her upper New York State congressional district.

B) She knew she wanted to move up in the Democratic Party and part of
that litmus test is being anti-gun and having a disdain for the National
Rifle Association of America.

I'm starting to think she was a Congresswoman who wanted to accurately
represent her pro-gun area of upstate New York but once she realized she
wanted to climb the political ladder, she knew she had to change her
position – and quickly.

No one suddenly abandons any kind of personal beliefs or convictions in
a few months and do a complete 180. She changed positions to benefit her
politically. Being anti-gun and wanting to "take on the gun lobby" is a
litmus test for the Democratic Party. And the fact that she had previous
ties to the NRA – the very "gun lobby" she's supposed to be against –
didn't help her cause.

Don't be fooled into thinking she suddenly had a wake up call and
realized she was wrong with her positions or she only cared about a
select group of people. Gillibrand is proving she's someone who can be
easily swayed by political pressure and desires.

Here's the full letter:
(go to the citation for details)
a425couple
2019-05-19 02:30:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by a425couple
from
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/05/18/flashback-remember-when-kirsten-gillibrand-was-progun-n2546525
Hypocrite Alert: Gillibrand Admits She Never Truly Believed In The 2A
Sen Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) recently came out with a proposal to "end
gun violence." In her plan, she called for the typical points
ant-gunners love to cling to. She wants to establish universal
background checks; create a federal law against trafficking guns;
reestablish an assault weapons ban; ban bump stocks (hello, that's
already been done) and "large-capacity" magazines. ----
---------------------------
Back in 2008, Gillibrand wrote a letter to Chris Cox, the Executive
Director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative
Action. In the letter, she positioned herself as a being pro-gun and
someone who wanted to work with the gun rights group.
"To begin with, I want to be very clear that I always have and always
will believe that the correct interpretation fo the 2nd amendment is
that it applies to an individual's right to carry guns, and does not
apply generally to the National Guard or a group of individuals in a
State," Gillibrand wrote.
-------------------------------
What's ironic is her so-called agenda are all things she previously said
she didn't believe in.
"On the question of outright banning certain firearms for cosmetic
features, bullets of an random size, or banning magazines holding an
arbitrary number of cartridges, I am adamantly opposed and do not
believe that laws should be based on random limits just for the sake of
limiting gun ownership or usage," she wrote. "Furthermore, the attempt
to limit the purchase of firearms to arbitrary time periods – such as
'one gun-a-month' – will not solve any crimes and will only curtain the
Constitutional rights of law abiding citizens. I share your concerns
about these and other attempts to that could contribute to the slippery
slope of government confiscation of people's firearms based on the
arbitrary whims of politics and public opinion."
Gillibrand also talked about how she submitted an amicus curae (friend
of the court) brief in favor of the Heller decision.
"...I was pleased that the Court correctly stood up for gun owners
throughout the District by striking down the unconstitutional firearms
restrictions," she wrote.  She also cited a couple bills she sponsored
in the House, including The Second Amendment Enforcement Act and the
Tiahrt Amendment.
At the time the letter was written she had an "A" rating from the NRA.
Shortly after being elected to the Senate, her score quickly went to an
"F" because of her anti-gun voting record.
Now that she's being called out for her hypocrisy, the presidential
hopeful is spinning the policy shift as a "simple mistake."
also
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/60-minutes-either-duped-by-gillibrands-nra-stance-or-helping-her-cover-tracks/#axzz5oKj9eJWp

Read more:
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/60-minutes-either-duped-by-gillibrands-nra-stance-or-helping-her-cover-tracks/#ixzz5oKkI2cHc

Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

‘60 Minutes’ Either Duped by Gillibrand’s NRA Stance or Helping Her
Cover Tracks
Ammoland Inc. Posted on February 14, 2018 by David Codrea

No, it’s about pandering liars and turncoats. Will CBS News demand her
NRA questionnaire, or will it continue to accept her “hunting” whitewash
to help conceal what she promised when that was the most expedient way
to gain political power?
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) said
in an interview aired Sunday that she is ‘embarrassed’ and ‘ashamed’ by
her previous pro-gun position and tough stance on illegal immigration,”
The Washington Free Beacon noted Monday. The story was reporting on a
Sunday “60 Minutes” interview by reporter Sharyn Alfonsi with the
politician once given an “A” rating by the National Rifle Association.

“I was wrong,” Gillibrand claimed. “What it's about is the power of the
NRA and the greed of that industry. Let's be clear, it is not about
hunters' rights. It's about money.”

She got one thing right— the Second Amendment is not about hunter’s
rights. But the greed was Gillibrand’s — for gaining more power by
abandoning her local constituency when the opportunity for a wider one
was offered. And she’s still lying when she tries to pass her past
rating off as merely trying to appeal to upstate New York hunters.

How can we know?
“The NRA-PVF ranks political candidates – irrespective of party
affiliation – based on voting records, public statements and their
responses to an NRA-PVF questionnaire.”

While we don’t have a copy of the questionnaire Gillibrand returned, we
do have a copy of one another federal candidate completed that tells us
the types of questions she would have had to “get right.”

Conservative candidate Joe Miller shared his “perfect” questionnaire
with me, back when NRA was sidelining him in favor of establishment pick
Lisa Murkowski. Among the things Gillibrand would have had to freely
say she agreed with:

She opposed legislation banning semi-automatic firearms and their
ammuniton and magazines.
She supported right-to-carry.
She opposed legislation ending private sales.
She agreed a judge’s record and belief in the Second Amendment as an
individual right should be “important factors” for confirmation votes.
Importantly, because it directly refutes the whitewashing deception she
gave “60 Minutes,” she opposed “sporting purposes” requirements.
She agreed that the Second Amendment is a fundamental individual right
applicable to state and local governments as well as to the federal
government.
There’s plenty more, but how the questionnaire may have been changed
from the time when she completed it is unclear. Still, it’s a near
certainty that the fundamental queries above would have been asked, and
answers would have had to be on the mark with gun owner interests.

That Gillibrand would try to cover her tracks by downplaying her
involvement with “gun rights” to one of “mistakenly” pandering to
hunters is not surprising. She’s a veteran politician experienced in
deception and betrayal, something I documented numerous times over the
years, from her initial turning to her coming out as a full-blown enemy.

She hasn't worried about that in the Senate because blue state New York
is a “safe” seat for her. This is an attempt to sanitize her for a wider
electorate as a presidential bid is pondered. And gun owners talking
about it on gun websites will not be enough to impede that.

Instead, why not appeal to a media outlet that has broader reach?

To CBS News: “60 Minutes,” correspondent Sharyn Alfonsi and your viewers
have been duped with misdirection and lies of omission. Unless you
present the full record, you will have allowed Kirsten Gillibrand to use
you and put your credibility at risk.

She reduced things to hunting to conceal the depth of her willing
involvement. She left quite a bit out – on purpose.

Why not demand to know the promises she made (and then discarded) about
semi-autos, right-to-carry, private sales, judicial nominations and the
like? Why not demand that she release her NRA questionnaire to you, and
then make it available to the public? If nothing else, it would be a scoop.

As for Gillibrand’s “switch” on immigration, that’s not hard to
understand at all. Democrats are depending on the “pathway to
citizenship” to dominate the electorate. That our “gun rights leaders”
(current and prospective) refuse to recognize the existential threat
that represents to continued legal recognition of the Second Amendment
is on them.

Gillibrand should be embarrassed by her own shameless political
opportunism. And if they don’t expose her for playing them, Sharyn
Alfonsi, “60 Minutes” and CBS News should be embarrassed for being
willing tools. Unless they’re complicit in trying to help her get ahead
of predictable criticism…

Still, why not take a few seconds and share this message?

@60Minutes demand @SenGillibrand #ReleaseTheNRAQuestionnaire .

About David Codrea:David Codrea

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for
investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights
advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and
associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes
from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

55 thoughts on “‘60 Minutes’ Either Duped by Gillibrand’s NRA Stance or
Helping Her Cover Tracks”

Read more:
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/60-minutes-either-duped-by-gillibrands-nra-stance-or-helping-her-cover-tracks/#ixzz5oKkunBNH

Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

Read more:
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/60-minutes-either-duped-by-gillibrands-nra-stance-or-helping-her-cover-tracks/#ixzz5oKl1JJ2U

Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

tomcat says:
February 15, 2018 at 12:24 PM
First of all, we got off the actual article of the blond b. from N.Y.
She is nothing but a self serving wench with a political agenda that
includes herself and only herself. She hanged tight around slick willie
while she needed his money and support then came after him for his
carousing. She did not give his money back, though, as she was suggested
to do. She made a big deal over the dems that couldn’t keep their hands
of staffers, but she still works with them. Maybe there are people in
N.Y. that voted for her because of her stand on the 2A. Maybe they will
remember that and fire her, doubtful.
As far as Z.S and D.J.H are concerned, the only thing I can say is they
are both brain dead and irrelevant. They can not explain why it is ok to
kill babies before they are born but not ok to own a gun. Kool Aid anyone?



Marc DV says:
February 15, 2018 at 9:40 AM
Wasn’t she the one who got money from the Clintons ?
And stood side by side with Hilldabeast during the Election ?
Also Never Denounced Billy boy’s Actions Against Women !
CBS … You Brought any disgrace to yourself.
She’s a Con. and You where the Mark !
She will say and do what ever it takes to Gain Power .
SORRY ! NOTTTTTT !

Loading...