Connect with us

News

Pro-gun Confiscation Group Receives a Wuhan Virus Handout

Published

on

Last week one of the premier anti-Second Amendment groups received a sizeable Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan.

According to the Washington Free Beacon, Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence “received between $350,000 and $1 million on April 10 to support 41 employees, according to the Small Business Administration.”

Interestingly, Brady’s political branch, Brady PAC spent a cool $4 million to help get former Vice President Joe Biden and other pro-gun control candidates elected. In a time when humbler small business operations are going under, Brady was still able to receive government aid.

Trending: GOP Establishment Threatens President Trump with Impeachment Unless He Denies Election Fraud

Sure, goes to show where D.C.’s priorities are.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Liam Sullivan, a spokesman for the Brady Center, defended his organization’s decision to turn to the government for help, claiming that the pandemic dented the organization’s funding. Additionally, the pandemic caused the Brady Center to scrap fundraising events and even its annual gala.

“Like other nonprofits, the Brady Center is funded by giving and fundraising events, both of which obviously have been impacted and will be impacted for the foreseeable future,” he remarked. “We just applied and were approved, obviously, under the same sort of criteria as others with concerns for payroll.”

The Free Beacon noted how there is a strong chance that the government aid could be used by Brady for electoral purposes:

Sullivan also emphasized that the Brady Center and Brady PAC are legally separate groups and the Brady Center is not involved in election spending. It is, however, common for money to be moved between aligned organizations like the Brady Center, Campaign, and PAC. Federal records show the Brady PAC paid the Brady Campaign more than $50,000 for use of its staff and travel reimbursements in April, and the Brady Center reported owing the Brady Campaign more than $1.1 million in 2015.

Furthermore, SBA documents revealed that other anti-Second Amendment groups have received aid from the PPP program, which was allegedly created to help small businesses keep their doors open during the Wuhan virus shutdowns.

The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence was able to receive a loan between $150,000 and $350,000 at the end of April in order to meet payment obligations for its employees. Giffords unveiled a national tour in support of anti-gun candidates that is being led by the advocacy wing of its organization. The group announced it plans on spending a “six figure sum in online engagement” on the tour.

“This is the year we will elect a gun safety majority in the Senate,” former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords declared in a statement.

However, on the pro-gun side of the aisle, no prominent organizations were able to receive loans. Free Beacon highlighted the following:

A Free Beacon review of the Small Business Administration records did not find listings for PPP loans given to prominent gun-rights groups, though the disclosures only include loans of more than $150,000. The National Rifle Association, which has struggled during the pandemic and even had to lay off a significant number of staff members, confirmed that none of its arms had taken any PPP loans.

Similarly, Alan Gottlieb, the chairman of the Citizens’ Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, said that no branch of his organization received PPP loans. Gottlieb cited ethical concerns about taking on government loans and using them for political advocacy.

“As chairman of the Citizens’ Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, since one of the arms is political, I would not have applied for it,” Gottlieb said to the Free Beacon. “I don’t think it’s appropriate.”

Gottlieb urged the anti-gun organizations to return the money they received from the government.

“I find it appalling they applied for, took, and even got PPP loans,” Gottlieb declared. “The Brady Center and Giffords should give the money back. Gun owners in this country shouldn’t have their tax dollars used to support groups that want to take their guns away.”

Knowing the Left and its political appendages, they will most likely not even bother to return these loans. Their entire existence is predicated on government largesse and using the state to advance their political agenda

Immigration

Flashback: Ann Coulter Warns Steve Bannon about Donald Trump’s Hires During 2016

Coulter tells it like it is.

Published

on

Earlier this week, former White House adviser Steve Bannon reached out to President Donald Trump, in an apparent move to reconcile with the president. Bannon was one of the more renowned advisors in the Trump administration who received a lot of attention for his unconventional views. The former White House adviser is likely looking for Trump to pardon him for several federal criminal charges that he is currently facing.

Bannon was one of the strongest contrarian voices on the right who questioned traditional conservative dogma on free trade and immigration. His rise to prominence represented a raw, populist anger that was building within the Republican Party base. Bannon ended up leaving the Trump administration after the infamous Charlottesville rally. This left a massive void for populist voices within the Trump brain trust, which was never adequately filled with populist figures.

Most of the strong populist voices during the Trump era came from the outside. Conservative commentator Ann Coulter has been one of the leading figures trying to steer populist discourse in America.Although a harsh critic, Coulter did her best to hold President Trump accountable and watch his every move, especially personnel decisions that did not align with his America first vision. To the average pro-Trump individual, Coulter’s criticism may come off as abrasive, but it was and still is  necessary to have a viable nationalist movement.

As a reminder to her followers about how she knew that there were subversive elements in the Trump administration who wanted to gut the president’s America First agenda and pursue more traditional Republican policies, she tweeted about email correspondence she had with Bannon dating back to December 2, 2016. In light of the rapprochement between Bannon and Trump, Coulter called attention to how she warned the former White House adviser about some of the latter’s questionable staffing decisions during the early stages of his presidency.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Coulter tweeted, “No, actually, I knew Trump was betraying us pretty early on – and that it would cost him re-election. My December 2, 2016 email to Steve Bannon:”

In an email sent on December 2, 2016 with a subject line titled “ghost of christmas future”, Coulter warned then-White House adviser Bannon about some of Trump’s hiring decisions.

She first noted that “the fact that Trump is even CONSIDERING rep. Mccaul (rubio in the house) for homeland — and is NOT considering kobach— tells me we’re not getting any major deportations, no removal of refugees, no e-verify, no end to end anchor babies… and trump will be dead.

also, “mad dog” isn’t going to build a wall.”

She was referring to Texas Congressman Michael McCaul, a known mass migration booster and a potential nominee for the head of the Department of Homeland Security. United States Marine Corps General James Matthis would be Trump’s first Secretary of Defense, who ended up turning out to be a Deep State hack. On the other hand, Kris Kobach is a nationally recognized immigration hawk, who gained fame for implementing some of the stiffest voter ID standards in the nation during his time as Secretary of State.

The Trump administration was successful in implementing several administrative changes that limited immigration and also did not get involved in any nation-building engagements like previous administrations.

Nevertheless, Coulter’s incisive suggestions still have use for future Republican administrations. The new GOP should follow Coulter’s pro-migration restriction suggestions if it wants to not only remain politically relevant, but also protect the integrity of America’s political system.

Continue Reading

Trending