Glenn Beck Program Bans Any Talk Of Trump

Anybody who supports Trump is completely devoid of principle. Trump is an antigun pro-abortion socialized healthcare nutjob who helped engineer the Pelosi-Reid majorities and helped install Terry McAuliffe as governor of Virginia, and gave six figures to Shillary when she was not in any position to help him. He buys eminent domain condemnations, and is about as far from libertarianism or constitutionalism as one can possibly get. This whackjob is a progressive liberal socialist who is just telling people whatever the f they want to hear.

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/07/don...assault-weapons-gun-free-zones/#axzz3gsQoUxSf

Donald Trump Talks: Gun Control, Assault Weapons, Gun Free Zones & Self Defense
By Fredy Riehl
Editor AmmoLand Shooting Sports News
Posted on July 7, 2015

New York, NY – -(Ammoland.com)- Hello Mr Trump. Many of our readers are very excited that you have thrown your hat in the ring to run for president in 2016.

They like the idea that you have nothing to do with politics and that you have real experience running large, successful business, successful being the key word. I hope you and your family are up for the challenges of running for president.

AmmoLand: Speaking of family I know you and your sons recently attended the 2015 NRA Annual Meeting, where you were asked to speak. How long have you been active with the NRA and what do you think about the influence the NRA has in politics?

Donald Trump:

“I am a Life Member of the NRA and am proud of their service in protecting our right to keep and bear arms. The NRA’s efforts to stop dangerous, gun-banning legislation and regulation is invaluable. The media focus on those efforts overshadows the great work the NRA does on behalf of safety and conservation.

I have a permit to carry and, living in New York, I know firsthand the challenges law-abiding citizens have in exercising their Second Amendment rights. My most trusted sources are my sons, Don, Jr. and Eric. They are fantastic sportsmen and are deeply involved in hunting, competitive shooting, and habitat conservation.”

AmmoLand: The deceptive term “Assault Weapons” has proven to be a buzz word among the anti-gun media. Back in 2000 in your book “The America We Deserve” you wrote “The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse to even limited restrictions. I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I also support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun.” Since that time the AR15 rifle, what the media calls an “assault weapons“, has become America’s most popular firearm with millions and millions of them owned by good people.

Do you still stand by this quote or has your thinking evolved over the 15 years since you wrote that line?

Donald Trump:

“I certainly stand by my opposition to Gun Control when it comes to taking guns from law-abiding citizens. You mention that the media describes the AR-15 as an “assault rifle,” which is one example of the many distortions they use to sell their agenda. However, the AR-15 does not fall under this category. Gun-banners are unfortunately preoccupied with the AR-15, magazine capacity, grips, and other aesthetics, precisely because of its popularity.”

“To the Left every gun is an assault weapon.”

“Gun control does not reduce crime. It has consistently failed to stop violence. Americans are entitled to protect their families, their property and themselves. In fact, in right-to-carry states the violent crime rate is 24% lower than the rest of the United States and the murder rate is 28% lower. This should not be up for debate.”

AmmoLand: You have been a long time resident of New York City and we can only assume that you know former Mayor Michael Bloomberg pretty well. We have followed his efforts to undermine the Second Amendment through his various anti-gun front groups. What does he have against the RKBA and why don’t we see wealthy conservatives making a similar ‘all in’ push to support gun rights?

Donald Trump:

“Mayor Bloomberg and I are friends. However, on this we agree to disagree. I believe there are two reasons you do not see a similar effort from Mayor Bloomberg’s polar opposite. ”

“First, many wealthy live behind gates, armed security, and away from crime. They may have little understanding of how fellow citizens are challenged in defending themselves and their property. The second reason is that we have the NRA and other groups already in the arena.”

“The Trump family knows these organizations are the best investment if we are to defend the right to keep and bear arms.”

AmmoLand: Karl Rove recently voiced support for a repeal of the Second Amendment as a way to stop gun violence. What do you think of this suggestion or, as our readers believe, is it a God given right that can not be repealed by politicians?

Donald Trump:

“Karl Rove is a proven loser. He wasted $400 million in 2012 and did not win a single race.

“The Second Amendment is a bedrock natural right of the individual to defend self, family, and property. It is a ridiculous notion to ever repeal it.”

“For Rove to even think it shows a lack of respect for all of the freedoms in our Constitution and a complete ignorance of our shared American inheritance.”

AmmoLand: As we have reported on AmmoLand Shooting Sports News, two of your sons, Eric and Donald Trump Jr., have been the target of harassment by anti-hunting groups after they posted pictures of their successes while hunting in Africa. What advice do you have for other hunters that maybe be being bullied online or elsewhere by this shrill minority?

Donald Trump:

“My advice is to remain vigilant. Harassment of this nature will always be with us, but we know that Americans have inherited a strong outdoor and shooting heritage that we are happy to defend.”

“The 2nd Amendment is right, not a privilege. The small minority of anti-everything activists may be vocal, but we have facts, and the Constitution, on our side.”

“I would also add that hunters contribute more to the preservation of game animals and their habitat than any of these protesters. Hunters are the original conservationists. To see this historically you have to look no further then Teddy Roosevelt and his creation of the National Parks System.”

Successful hunters, Donald Trump Jr., and Eric Trump pose for a picture with a Cape Buffalo in Africa.
Successful hunters, Donald Trump Jr., and Eric Trump pose for a picture with a Cape Buffalo in Africa.
AmmoLand: Universal Background Checks to acquire guns is something President Obama has long been pushing for, yet background checks would not or did not stop any of the recent shooters from getting guns. What is your position on Background Checks? And do you see a need for even more government approval for someone to own a gun?

Donald Trump:

“I do not support expanding background checks. The current background checks do not work.”

“They make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to acquire firearms while consistently failing to stop criminals from getting guns. We should re-examine our policy to make sure that these prohibitions do not impede law abiding citizens from exercising their Second Amendment rights.”

AmmoLand: A lot of Democrats in politics today are crying for firearms magazine restrictions. But as we saw just with the Charleston, S.C. church killer, he used standard capacity magazines and quickly changed them out five or more times. So how does it make any sense to have gun magazine size limits?

Donald Trump:

“Gun magazine limits do not make common sense. I have long opposed such limits. For instance, I fought the SAFE Act in New York, which I call the “Unsafe Act.” I also spoke at a rally in Albany championing gun rights and protesting the Unsafe Act. The law limited capacity to seven rounds, as if criminals were going to take rounds out of their magazines before committing a crime. It was later changed to a limit of ten rounds, but the entire episode was a complete disaster.”

“Never mindful of the results, this effort was just one more attempt to erode the Second Amendment.”

AmmoLand: Lots of AmmoLand’s active duty readers have complained that many, if not all, of our military bases are “Gun Free Zones” and that these highly trained war fighters are left defenseless and disarmed against murderers, like the Fort Hood Shooter, when they are stationed on U.S. bases. Would you have a problem allowing our military bases to set their own polices with regard to personal weapons and do away with the “Gun Free Zones” death trap?

Donald Trump:

“[gun free zones] No, not optional. As Commander-in-Chief, I would mandate that soldiers remain armed and on alert at our military bases.

President Clinton never should have passed a ban on soldiers being able to protect themselves on bases. America’s Armed Forces will be armed.

They will be able to defend themselves against terrorists. Our brave soldiers should not be at risk because of policy created by civilian leadership. Political correctness has no place in this debate.”

AmmoLand: Thank you for taking the time to answer some of our questions today. We wish you the best of luck in your presidential run. As we leave you would you like to tell our readers what the Second Amendment means to you and your family?

Donald Trump:

“The Trump family will stay vigilant in our support of right to keep and bear arms. And given today’s threats across the United States it is as important now as ever. National Security begins in our homes. All citizens must have the ability to protect themselves, their families, and their property. The Second Amendment is a right, not a privilege. Our safety and defense is embodied in the Second Amendment and I will always protect this most important right.

“Our country is ready for a bold new direction. We can bring common sense to Washington. This is our time to Make America Great Again!”
 
"Are you saying past behavior is a predictor of future actions?"

Yes.

Yes it is. Especially if you have a lot of past behavior to go off of with no signs of a change in behavior.
 
is Hillary talk banned from Beck? or Sanders? Trump is, with all his baggage and problems, the leader among GOP voters. Trump should be included in the debates, and included on the news. its news, not just good news. banning Trump makes as much sense as banning reporting of mass shootings or earthquakes.
 
Well why would we ban it? Ron Paul isn't running so it makes sense to support someone else. For many of us, that someone is Trump.

What?


Ron Paul and Donald Trump could not be more different, politically. Who here would ever support Trump?

That'd be some SERIOUS cognitive dissonance. Or trolling.
 
I have ended up voting 3rd party since the 90s rather than support the lesser. If this is a chance to break the back of the Republican establishment and the media I will take it. 3rd party or sitting home and allowing Jeb to take it gets us no where.



Not really, what I posted shows 2011. It may or may not go back further than that, I just have not checked. Same with healthcare. I do not discount what you are saying, like the rest we could be getting played.

2011, eh?

And remind us again what year he 1st decided to pretend to run for President? Remember, when he was a birther?
 
2011, eh?

And remind us again what year he 1st decided to pretend to run for President? Remember, when he was a birther?

If Rand loses, Trump at least provides a chance to break the back of the Republican establishment and media. You really thinks things will be better under Hillary or Jeb Bush, 3rd party or not counted write-on votes?

Despite his faults at least he is campaigning to allow healthcare companies to compete across state lines, doing something about immigration and trade. It is all but guaranteed the opposite will occur under Jeb or Hillary.

Regardless the Republican nominee will not be Rand or Trump and will be the Republican establishment and medias pick like it is 4 four years (this cycle Jeb). I do not see how it will be any different this cycle. It just remains to be seen how they will take down Trump since we already know how they will take out Rand.
 
If Rand loses, Trump at least provides a chance to break the back of the Republican establishment and media. You really thinks things will be better under Hillary or Jeb Bush, 3rd party or not counted write-on votes?

Despite his faults at least he is campaigning to allow healthcare companies to compete across state lines, doing something about immigration and trade. It is all but guaranteed the opposite will occur under Jeb or Hillary.

Regardless the Republican nominee will not be Rand or Trump and will be the Republican establishment and medias pick like it is 4 four years (this cycle Jeb). I do not see how it will be any different this cycle. It just remains to be seen how they will take down Trump since we already know how they will take out Rand.

We have members of Ron Paul community who are wrongly ascribing this coming primary contest as a purity test as opposed to a potential 'divide and conquer' exercise. I would love to be on the other side of a 'divide and conquer' operation for once.

Let's face facts. The establishment possesses a vise-hold over the institutions in this country. Trump, however blurs the lines of the this two party game since he is purely concerned about fulfilling his legacy. He has no need for money or power, but the lasting of his name and it's grandiose is paramount to his existence at this late stage of his life. So in essence, we have two immovable forces at work, one being the larger than life Trump and the other being the entrenched special interests that control the daily operations of the Republican Party. Theoretically, if this titanic clash occurs, there is a good chance the a large share of the Republican electorate will see firsthand how the RNC conducts business when their hand is forced.
 
Last edited:
If Rand loses, Trump at least provides a chance to break the back of the Republican establishment and media.

What does this mean?

How is Trump going to "break the back" of the establishment?

:confused:

He hurls petty personal insults at them, and doesn't challenge them on any important policies.

If he won the general election, nothing would change. All the big special interests would carry on as normal.

The one major effect of his candidacy is to distract voters from real issues (which is why I tend to think he's a plant).

You really thinks things will be better under Hillary or Jeb Bush, 3rd party or not counted write-on votes?

Despite his faults at least he is campaigning to allow healthcare companies to compete across state lines

Is there any Republican who isn't for inter-state insurance competition?

doing something about immigration and trade

The "something" that he's doing is stupid and counterproductive.
 
What does this mean?

How is Trump going to "break the back" of the establishment?

:confused:

He hurls petty personal insults at them, and doesn't challenge them on any important policies.

If he won the general election, nothing would change. All the big special interests would carry on as normal.

The one major effect of his candidacy is to distract voters from real issues (which is why I tend to think he's a plant).



Is there any Republican who isn't for inter-state insurance competition?



The "something" that he's doing is stupid and counterproductive.

The republican party ultimately derives legitimacy from it's voters, despite all it's hi-jinks to the contrary. Trump is openly waging war against the hypocrisy of the GOP on a few fronts, most notably globalized trade deals and corporate fueled immigration. Corporate interests clearly dictate the agenda of the GOP and this compelling truth will fracture the party even further. Donald Trump is the chisel working at this fracture, but I speculate that his motivations are purely about fulfilling his legacy.

images
 
We have members of Ron Paul community who are wrongly ascribing this coming primary contest as a purity test

The purist v. pragmatist debate is over what strategy a libertarian/conservative should adopt: an honest one or a Machiavellian one.

This has no bearing on Trump, since Trump is not a libertarian/conservative. He's a democratic socialist running in the Republican Party, like Bush or McCain.

Let's face facts. The establishment possesses a vise-hold over the institutions in this country. Trump, however blurs the lines of the this two party game since he is purely concerned about fulfilling his legacy. He has no need for money or power, but the lasting of his name and it's grandiose is paramount to his existence at this late stage of his life. So in essence, we have two immovable forces at work, one being the larger than life Trump and the other being the entrenched special interests that control the daily operations of the Republican Party. Theoretically, if this titanic clash occurs, there is a good chance the a large share of the Republican electorate will see firsthand how the RNC conducts business when their hand is forced.

And?

How does any of this help advance our cause (reducing the size of government)?

:confused:

You Trumpsters are sounding increasingly like the Hope and Changers of 2008.

We need change!

...never-mind what kind.
 
We have members of Ron Paul community who are wrongly ascribing this coming primary contest as a purity test as opposed to a potential 'divide and conquer' exercise.

I wouldn't call it the Ron Paul community anymore. So many good people left. What we have now is to an extent a dumb leftover.
 
The purist v. pragmatist debate is over what strategy a libertarian/conservative should adopt: an honest one or a Machiavellian one.

This has no bearing on Trump, since Trump is not a libertarian/conservative. He's a democratic socialist running in the Republican Party, like Bush or McCain.



And?

How does any of this help advance our cause (reducing the size of government)?

:confused:

You Trumpsters are sounding increasingly like the Hope and Changers of 2008.

We need change (never mind what kind...)!

What honest course of action? Our candidates cannot win at this juncture of time, unless Rand resurrects from the dead. Dark forces align against and wish to vanquish us. I suspect Massie will be on that hit list the CoC recently created.
 
What honest course of action? Our candidates cannot win at this juncture of time, unless Rand resurrects from the dead. Dark forces align against and wish to vanquish us. I suspect Massie will be on that hit list the CoC recently created.

That is a non-response.

Explain to me how Trump's run helps our cause.
 
That is a non-response.

Explain to me how Trump's run helps our cause.

Trump places doubt in the mind of the Republican mainstream voter that the party represents he or she. That creeping doubt allows people like us to pick up the pieces. Suddenly, the outsider doesn't appear so fearful after the emperor has been disrobed. Ultimately, we are concerned with breaking down the media driven orthodoxy and having an opportunity for our ideas to be heard in an unbiased manner.
 
Trump places doubt in the mind of the Republican mainstream voter that the party represents he or she. That creeping doubt allows people like us to pick up the pieces. Suddenly, the outsider doesn't appear so fearful after the emperor has been disrobed. Ultimately, we are concerned with breaking down the media driven orthodoxy and having an opportunity for our ideas to be heard in an unbiased manner.

Except that our ideas have no relation to Trump's.

Vague hatred of the establishment =/= libertarianism, does not open the door to libertarianism.
 
I wouldn't call it the Ron Paul community anymore. So many good people left. What we have now is to an extent a dumb leftover.
Smart principled Ron Paulers do not fall for the Trump film-flam. I remember when Trump called Ron Paul "a joke." It's the 'dumb leftover' who are Trumpster apologists.
 
What?


Ron Paul and Donald Trump could not be more different, politically. Who here would ever support Trump?

That'd be some SERIOUS cognitive dissonance. Or trolling.


I have been a staunch supporter of Ron Paul since 2007. I helped organize the Veterans for Ron Paul March on the White House in 2012. As a result, I had the opportunity to stand on stage with Paul when he gave a speech at a campaign stop, though I declined it to let someone younger have the spot. I ended up voting for Gary Johnson, not because I like his politics but as a protest vote for how Paul was treated. So, if anyone has been a true Paul supporter it is I.

Despite the fact that Trump is a degenerate bozo and bad on most issues, he is actually the most like Paul on the most important issue: immigration. When the house is on fire, you put out the fire; you don't rearrange the furniture. Paul was a staunch opponent of immigration. Most importantly, he opposed giving citizenship to illegals. He always got an "A" from Numbers USA.

Now it is true that Trump changes his political positions more often than his wives, but I care most about the fact that he's pushing the Overton Window (look up the concept, it is very important) to the right. Other politicians will see that, although unpopular with their cocktail party buddies, stances on immigration other than far-left are widely popular with the electorate and thus are the key to power. Some will defect from the cartel to grab the votes.
 
Back
Top