“Russ Feingold, the former Democratic senator from Wisconsin who is running again in an attempt to win back his old Senate seat, was recorded at a fundraiser saying that Hillary Clinton might issue an executive order on guns,” freebeacon.com reports.
The video was captured by James O’ Keefe’s Project Veritas at an Aug. 17, $2,700 per-head fundraiser held at the Palo-Alto, Calif., home of Democratic donors Amy Rao and Harry Plant. Palo-Alto is located 10 minutes away from Stanford University, where Feingold taught after leaving his position as a special envoy at the U.S. State Department.
Is there any doubt that President Clinton II would use an Executive Order to further her civilian disarmament agenda? Not in my mind.
While the attention here is on an EO for “universal background checks,” let’s not forget that the Democratic presidential hopeful’s got a hard-on for revoking the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act (shielding manufacturers from liability for the criminal misuse of their products).
Despite the law, Ms. Clinton could instruct the DOJ and/or newly formed Bureau of Consumer Protection to take action against gun makers. By the same token, what are the odds she’d do something presidential to restrict “assault weapons” after a terrorist attack or spree killing? A lot better than even money.
Any Executive Order or bureaucratic dictat aimed at disarming civilians would be met with stiff opposition in Congress (even if the Republicans lose the Senate). A lawsuit would certainly follow. But those things take time; the damage would be done.
If/when Ms. Clinton moves on guns, with or without legislative backing, the American bi-furcation between liberty-loving conservatives and statists would continue. Make that worsen. A house divided and all that . . .