This is What Democrats Accomplished With Their Gun Control Sit-In

Sierra Marlee reports that shockingly, or not, it turns out there were 26 Democrats among the anti-Second Amendment sit-in on the House floor who actually OWN firearms themselves.

The 25-hour sit-in was a pathetic attempt at a protest for stricter gun control laws that infringe on the 5th Amendment rights of Americans everywhere.

During the time, there were 26 Democrats who own firearms trying to make it difficult for others to own firearms.

Here is the full list of Democrats who are known to own guns below:

  • Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick
  • Rep. Bennie Thompson
  • Rep. Dina Titus
  • Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger
  • Rep. Jared Huffman
  • Rep. Jim Cooper
  • Rep. Jim Costa
  • Rep. John Carney
  • Rep. John Garamendi
  • Rep. Keith Ellison
  • Rep. Mike Thompson
  • Rep. Peter DeFazio
  • Rep. Peter Welch
  • Rep. Rick Nolan
  • Rep. Ron Kind
  • Rep. Steve Cohen
  • Rep. Tim Ryan
  • Sen. Gary Peters
  • Sen. Harry Reid
  • Sen. Mark Warner
  • Sen. Martin Heinrich
  • Sen. Patrick Leahy
  • Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse
  • Sen. Tammy Baldwin
  • Sen. Tim Kaine
  • Sen. Tom Carper

While Democrats are beside themselves trying to accuse conservatives and the NRA of helping terrorists buy guns, the opposite is actually true; we are supporting the freedom of law abiding Americans to be able to exercise their rights.

We don’t support having our rights denied to us simply because a corrupted government added our name to an arbitrary list without due process.

The American government was never supposed to have this amount of power over the people and our God-given rights.

As Benjamin Franklin said: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Nobody has the right to ask us to give up our liberties for an idea as vague as “safety,” certainly not men and women who are so out of touch with Main Street, America that they think they can make a valid argument for gun control while surrounded by armed security.

If any of the above Congressmen represent you, please give them a call and let them know that you will NEVER support them unless and until they change their stance on gun control.

Floor Fight: Tom Cotton Blasts ‘Cancerous’ Harry Reid’s ‘Bitter, Vulgar, Incoherent Ramblings’



Senator Tom Cotton went directly after Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid from the floor of the Senate blasting Reid for more than two-minutes Wednesday morning.

Senator Cotton complained about listening to Reid’s “bitter, vulgar, incoherent ramblings,” and found a silver lining in a reduction in Senate work days because at least the Senate would be “cursed less with his [Reid’s] cancerous leadership.”

“I am forced to listen to the bitter, vulgar, incoherent ramblings of the Minority Leader,” Senator Cotton started. “Normally, like every other American, I ignore them. I can’t ignore them today, however.”

Senator Cotton unloaded on Minority Leader Reid during discussion of a defense bill that passed unanimously Wednesday. The Arkansas Senator invoked some of Harry Reid’s greatest hits including the Nevada Senator’s comments in 2007 that the Iraq war was lost and Reid’s infamous passing of Obamacare on Christmas Eve.

Cotton mocked Reid and railed against him:

When was the last time the Minority Leader read a bill? It was probably an electricity bill. What about the claims that it was written in the dark of night? It’s been public for weeks. And this coming from a man who drafted Obamacare in his office and rammed it through this Senate at midnight on Christmas Eve on a straight party line vote?

To say that he’s delaying this because he cares for the troops, a man who never served himself, a man who in April 2007 came to this very floor before the surge had even reached its peak and said the war is lost, when over 100 Americans were being killed in Iraq every month, when I was carrying their dead bodies off an airplane at Dover Air Force Base. It is an outrage to say that we had to delay this because he cares for the troops. We are delaying it for one reason and one reason only: to protect his own sad, sorry legacy.

Senator Cotton finished by insulting Senator Reid’s “cancerous leadership.”

“He now complains in the mornings that the Senate is not in session enough,” Cotton finished. “That our calendar is too short. Well, whatever you think about that, the happy byproduct of fewer days in session in the Senate is that this institution will be cursed less with his cancerous leadership. I yield the floor.”

*(THERE IS NOTHING RARE ABOUT THIS.)* – Obama and GOP show ‘rare’ alliance over 9/11 bill that could harm US-Saudi ties

A bipartisan Senate bill that would allow the families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia over suspected links to terrorists appears to have made strange bedfellows of President Obama and Senate Republicans, who have united against the legislation.

As the bill’s fate hangs in the balance, Capitol Hill lawmakers across party lines are divided on whether to advance the legislation. If passed, it could jeopardize relations between Washington and Riyadh, one of the US’s closest allies in the Middle East.

Passed in the Senate Judiciary Committee in January, the bipartisan “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act” would strip immunity from foreign governments in cases “arising from a terrorist attack that kills an American on American soil.”

READ MORE: ‘Americans need to tell their government to declassify 28 pages of 9/11 report’

Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Chuck Schumer (D-New York) are the original co-sponsors. Senators Al Franken (D-Minnesota) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) have also signed on in support.

However, it’s unclear when – if ever – it will come to a vote in the Senate or the House. It is currently being blocked by an anonymous senator, a move that would require a minimum of 60 senate votes to overcome.

Screen Shot 2016-04-21 at 6.48.50 PM

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) has said that no vote has been scheduled yet.

Keeping the legislation in limbo works to President Obama’s advantage, as he opposes the bill, like many of his unlikely allies – Republicans in both the House and Senate.

The White House has been lobbying against the proposal despite widespread support among the president’s fellow Democrats in the Senate.

By contrast, the division appears to have created rare unity between Obama and some of his staunchest opponents, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin), both of whom have publicly expressed skepticism over the bill.

“We are obviously gratified that there are other Republicans that have taken a close look at this legislation and recognized the serious unintended consequences that could result from its passage,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said on Tuesday, admitting that alliances with GOP members are “rare.”

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) told reporters that he supports the bill like “almost everyone in the [Democratic] caucus,”but that the “pushback is coming from the Republicans.”

“I’ve spoken with the White House… they don’t particularly like it, but that’s okay,” Reid added.

The White House maintains that it would be “unwise” for the Senate to pass the legislation, which “does open up the United States to a unique degree of risk, and putting our country, our taxpayers, our service members and our diplomats in legal jeopardy in that way is contrary to our interests.” 

READ MORE: US Supreme Court rules Iran must pay almost $2bn to victims of 1983 terror attacks

On Tuesday, Senator Graham, who has put a hold on the bill, publicly expressed his doubts, saying that he wants to“make sure that anything we do doesn’t come to bite us.”

“Anything we do in this bill can be used against us later. So let’s say there’s a situation where you’ve got an American in a consulate or an embassy that’s got their own grudge against a government,” he said. “We want to make sure that we’re not liable for that.”

He specifically cited US support for Kurdish YPG fighters in Syria as an example.

“We’re helping the YPG Kurds, right?” Graham said. “They’re the cousins of the PKK, which is a terrorist organization in the eyes of the US government and the Turkish government. Well, if they collaborate on an attack inside Turkey, I don’t want to be held liable.”

His position has been shared by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), who also supports putting the legislation on ice to prevent it from coming to a vote.

“Everybody thinks this is the greatest bill since sliced bread,” Sessions said. “But you can have unintended consequences.”

Shortly before Earnest made his comments, Speaker Ryan also expressed uncertainty over the controversial law.

“I think we need to look at it,” Ryan said at a news conference, while declining to endorse the bill as of yet. “I think we need to review it to make sure we are not making mistakes with our allies and that we’re not catching people in this that shouldn’t be caught up in this.”

Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) has also expressed concern that passing the bill could strain relations with the Saudis, pointing out that they had pulled out of the fight against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) to go after Yemen.

“I’m concerned about the implications of taking this action on other activities, including the reaction of the Saudis, he said. “This president has managed to poison relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia that is unprecedented because of his desire to have some kind of relationship with Iran.”

Many top Republicans have refused to either publically support or oppose the legislation, saying that they need more time to think on it.

Majority Leader McConnell has said he is “still looking at it.”

Originally announced by Schumer and Cornyn in September of 2015, the legislation has recently regained attention, especially in light of a New York Times report claiming that the Saudis have threatened to sell off American assets worth 12 figures if Congress passes the bill.

READ MORE: ‘Saudi Arabia could expose those complicit in 9/11 if Obama releases secret Congressional report’

Possible links between the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack and Saudi Arabia may be hiding in 28 classified pages of a 2002 joint congressional inquiry into the matter. The completely blank 28 pages allegedly describe how Saudi Arabian nationals with links to the government financially assisted some or all of the 19 hijackers who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center’s twin towers and the Pentagon. Many people, including former Florida Senator Bob Graham, the co-author of the redacted pages, have been campaigning to have them declassified for years.

Speaking with Charlie Rose this week, President Obama hinted that the data could be declassified “very soon.”

When RT asked the State Department whether the Obama administration believes that current or former Saudi officials or members of Saudi Arabia’s royal family might have been in any way involved in the 9/11 attacks, spokesperson John Kirby refused to comment, readdressing the question to the internet and “the public record.”

“Look, I’m not going to re-litigate history here. The – you can go online and see the story of the attacks and how it happened and who was responsible, and I’m not going to re-litigate it here,” he said. “As it says in the report, there’s no indication that Saudi officials or the Saudi government was behind or supporting in any way those attacks,” he added.

*(RARE ALLIANCE? I DON’T THINK SO)* – In Rare Alliance, Obama, Ryan Oppose 9/11 Bill

House Speaker Paul Ryan greets President Barack Obama after he made remarks at the speaker’s annual Friends of Ireland Luncheon on Capitol Hill on March 15. (Photo By Al Drago/CQ Roll Call)

A Senate bill that would allow families of those killed in the 9/11 attacks to sue the Saudi government has achieved a rare Washington distinction, by uniting the Obama administration and some of its fiercest GOP critics.

President Barack Obama, Speaker Paul D. Ryan, R-Wis., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., are rallying to kill the bipartisan plan that would make it possible for American citizens to sue foreign governments believed to be linked to terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest warned the legislation could lead other countries to craft even broader versions that could do significant harm to the U.S. government.

“It certainly is plausible … that that other countries when they’re implementing these laws would not tailor them so specifically,” Earnest said. “And that does open up the United States to a unique degree of risk, and putting our country, our taxpayers, our service members and our diplomats in legal jeopardy in that way is contrary to our interests.”

Earnest said it would be “unwise” for the Senate to pass the legislation, “particularly when there is an alternative mechanism for us to resolve these kinds of issues with other countries.”

That alternative, he said, is “the essence of diplomacy.”

Shortly before Earnest appeared in the White House briefing room, Ryan spoke out against the so-called ‘9/11 bill.’

“I think we need to look at it,” Ryan told reporters at the Capitol. “I think we need to review it to make sure we are not making mistakes with our allies and that we’re not catching people in this that shouldn’t be caught up in this.

“The White House is opposed to it. It’s received some opposition here. We’re going to let these things work the process,” he added. “We’ll see where it goes from there.”

Administration officials are “gratified” to have Ryan as an ally as they try to block the legislation.

There has long been speculation that some members of the Saudi ruling family provided support to the al-Qaida hijackers on 9/11.

The White House on Tuesday picked up another unlikely partner in Graham, a hawkish Armed Services member and former GOP presidential candidate who is a frequent critic of Obama on foreign policy and national security matters. Graham placed a hold on the bill, wanting to review changes that have been made.

In fact, the legislation appears to align the president with many more Republican members than Democrats. Such scenarios, save a handful like trade bills, have been few and far between during Obama’s presidency.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada says that in the Senate, it’s Republicans that are more split.

“I support it, almost everyone in the caucus supports it,” Reid said of his Democrats.

Earnest acknowledged that this White House’s alliances with GOP members “is rare.”

“But I think in this instance it is an indication of just how significant these questions are, and, you know, we’re obviously gratified that there are other Republicans who have taken … a close look at this legislation and recognized the serious, unintended consequences that could result from its passage,” he said.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Tuesday declined to discuss prospects for the bill, which is sponsored by Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas and the No. 3 Senate Democrat, Charles E. Schumer of New York.

Graham appears to be “concerned with the way that this administration has treated our allies, and particularly Saudi Arabia as a result of the misguided Iran nuclear deal,” Cornyn told reporters. “And now the president seems to want to use the leverage of the 9/11 families in order to somehow mollify or cure that rift that the president has created.

“This is really narrow provision, which only has to do with terrorist attacks on our own soil,” Cornyn said, adding that it wasn’t necessarily the case that it would apply to Saudi Arabia. “Let’s let the chips fall where they may.”

Saudi leaders have threatened to sell $750 billion in U.S. assets should the 9/11 victims bill become law. Earnest, however, seemed to dismiss that threat earlier this week , saying the Middle East power is a “large economy” and has no interest in destabilizing the global economy.

On a related note, Reid said that he supported the position of members of the independent, bipartisan commission that investigated the attacks, who want to see 28 pages of their report that remain classified be made public. The material is believed to draw a picture of foreign support for the 9/11 hijackers.

White House officials are actively contacting members to make their case. Earnest said the administration would like to have “a dialogue” with lawmakers about the legislation.

– See more at: