Obama Meets with Bloomberg to Plot Civilian Disarmament. Executive Orders to Follow . . .

Together again- Michael Bloomberg and President Obama (courtesty washingtontimes.com)

Yesterday, President Barack Obama met with former New York Mayor and Everytown for Gun Safety jefe Michael Bloomberg at the White House to discuss civilian disarmament. “Obama has met with a series of gun control advocates in recent weeks as his aides complete work on a potential order expected to expand background checks on gun sales by closing the so-called ‘gun show loophole,'” cnn.com reports. “A timeline on the order — which has been tangled in legal and administrative questions — is still unknown.” As Walter Scott opined, oh what a tangled web they weave when first we practice to deceive! To wit: the White House is playing its cards close to its vest . . .

The White House said that Obama and Bloomberg “discussed ways to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have access to them and what more could be done at the state and local level to help address gun violence in America . . .

Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s senior adviser who also attended the meeting with Bloomberg Wednesday, said this week that the executive orders would be revealed in “short order,” but refused to offer any more detailed timelines.‎

In other words, they war-gamed ways to keep guns out of the hands of those who oppose their statist aspirations, on the federal, state and local levels. While Bloomberg’s anti-ballistic bully boys have concentrated their efforts – and their boss’s millions – on enacting gun control laws on the state level, the White House’s pending executive orders loom large.

That said, if the President signs anything other than minor tweaks to existing laws, the move will be met with The Mother of Political Push-Backs. Watch this space.


  1. avatar MikeB in WI says:

    Hmm, I must have missed the memo saying that it is the President who makes our laws now, and not the Congress.

    1. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

      Uh, lobbyists make the laws. Haven’t you seen the revised version of “I am only a bill”?

    2. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      Administrative Law gets to skirt a lot of Constitutional protections.

    3. avatar Art out West says:

      “Look Darth Vader with the Evil Emperor”.

      (Actually George Soros is the Evil Emperor, though Bloomberg works as well)

      Anybody else have that thought?

      Maybe I’m too much of a Sci-Fi nerd.

      1. avatar Terry Wood says:

        Bloomberg is a little man with the stereotypical Napoleon complex. He’s a little dictator wannabe with a big bank account. His ideas need to be crushed.

      2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        The Senate Republic has been absolved with the local Governors now directly controlled by the Emperor. Welcome to the Dark Side.

    4. avatar mark s. says:

      No , you missed the memo that said there would be no memos . He sent that one out about six years ago .

  2. avatar John Thomas says:

    “…keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have access to them…”

    they mean American citizens

    gentlemen, are you well prepared for some misbehavior?

    1. avatar Bob109 says:

      Absolutely. If they try what I suspect, I aim to misbehave.

      1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

        So did many people in NYC after the Sullivan Act was passed.

      2. avatar Jorge says:

        That better be a organized misbehavior because other than that will be call terrorism, well anything will be call terrorism.

    2. avatar Paul says:

      Well said John. I too, will misbehave…a lot. Stocking up on ammo and a few lowers in the interim.

    3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      +1 to John Thomas.

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Could be better, but I’m trying.

    5. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      “…keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have access to them…”
      they mean American citizens…

      but it should be the government.

  3. avatar Bob says:

    That man rolls around in entitlement like a pig in shiz.

  4. avatar Jason says:

    Anytime one of my liberal friends starts shrieking about “gun show loophole” I ask them to give me one example of a mass shooting incident in which the “gun show loophole” was a contributor.

    1. avatar SpeleoFool says:

      If anyone I knew started shrieking about the gun show loophole I’d just offer to drag them to a gun show.

      1. avatar Theo Braunohler says:

        To show them beef jerky and candied pecans? Unless you like $600 Glock 19’s and $300 Mosins, those are the only things worth buying at gun shows these days, at least around here.

        1. avatar Benny the Jew says:

          Damn, is beef jerky and candied pecans a universal gun show thing, because they have that at the one I go to in Corpus Christi, too!

        2. avatar Hank says:

          And that’s after you pay get in the door. I haven’t found one good deal at a gun show in years.

        3. avatar 80 D says:

          You forgot the $0.17 per round Thunderbolt .22LR…

        4. avatar Sixpack70 says:

          I found a CZ 83 and a CZ 52 for a really good price at the last gun show I went to. I was tempted by both, but held off as I was buying a different gun already. Dang budget!

        5. avatar FreakinPeanuts says:

          mmmmm Jerky

        6. avatar JSJ says:

          Lol. Last gun show I attended made me think the 115% of retail pricing on Gunbroker wasn’t so bad 🙂

      2. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin) says:

        I actually challenged someone to go with me and try to buy a gun without a BC. I even offered to pay the entry fee. He refused. Maybe it was because he already knew he was spewing BS because I put a $1000 price tag on it.

      3. avatar Ken says:

        You’re going to the wrong guns show, then. Any gun grabber can tell you that you can buy a multi-automatic rifle with a 30 magazine clip, capable of firing 200 rounds per second, for next to nothing with no questions asked.

        1. avatar Bill Graves says:

          Don’t forget that they are delivered by the US Postal Service, no questions asked!

    2. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      One hipster’s loophole is another man’s freedom.

    3. avatar dph says:

      Or instead, just try not to have shrieking liberal friends. The only shrieking liberals I associate with are family and that’s only on Thanksgiving and Christmas and then I walk away from their stupidity and ignorance only because it’s the holidays. You know what they say, “You can pick your nose and you can pick your friends but you’re stuck with your family.

  5. avatar PNG says:

    I love how he tries to deal with a legal fiction—the gun show loophole—with yet another—that his pen and phone magically give him lawmaking powers.
    I don’t have to comply with fiction.

    1. avatar mark s. says:

      Adolf didn’t even have to use the phone .
      Apple don’t fall far from the tree .
      The root is like a Box Elder , no matter how many times you cut em down , they always come back .

  6. avatar HP says:

    This is a good thing. Look at some of the latest polling information – Americans don’t support this stuff. The harder Obama and Bloomberg try to jam their progressive disarmament onto the populace, the less popular they and the rest of the Democrats will become.

    1. avatar Bob109 says:

      True. We have to ask, however, how much damage can he do in 2016? A lot. How far is he willing to go? Probably pretty far. I know many who will not give up their 2nd amendment rights, me included. The 2nd amendment is the only thing we have to stop tyranny. Will Obama cross that line in 2016? I hope not, but with his track record, there is a good chance he will. To say we live in scary times is an understatement.

      1. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin) says:

        I don’t think you, and other people who think that the Second Amendment prevents tyranny by direct action, don’t really understand the actual mechanism. It isn’t that a bunch armed citizens are going stop the government from imposing a dictatorship. It is the indiscipline that an attempt to disarm the population as prerequisite for establishing tyranny would create. The forces charged with carrying out the order will split. The organized state militias (the national guard) will be called out to oppose the Federal Government in many states, the regular armed forces will walk away from the job and so will many law enforcement organizations. This is how checks and balances work in our Constitutional system. It isn’t actual action that is required to defeat the tyrant. It is the mere threat to do so that keeps them in check. That is why the left is using salami slicing tactics to get to where they want. It’s a long game plan to get to where they want without a fight.

        1. avatar SAS 2008 says:

          The threat is only effective if in the end it will be backed by action.

        2. avatar Doc says:

          Obummer will use UN troops because he knows the US military took an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution against enemies, BOTH foreign AND DOMESTIC.

      2. avatar SAS 2008 says:

        The 2nd amendment is not the only thing we have to stop tyranny. It is the LAST way to stop tyranny. There are many checks and balances to help stop tyranny before we get to that point, including several other amendments in the bill of rights and the threat of getting to the point where those arms are not only kept, bore, but actually used.

  7. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    That said, if the President signs anything other than minor tweaks to existing laws, the move will be met with The Mother of Political Push-Backs

    By the likes of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell? Hardly.

    This country will be in open revolt before the next election. The federal government has lost the consent of people.

    1. Yes, Damn them for passing the Boehner-McConnell gun confiscation act. /sarc.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        The point he’s making, I believe, is that the GOP controlled Congress has done essentially nothing to stop Obamas many other, equally unconstitutional actions. We cannot depend on them growing a spine now.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Sad, but true. All the stiff resistance of France in 1940.

    2. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      Almost like he WANTS it to happen, isn’t it?

  8. avatar BigBoy says:

    Did they discuss a job opening for O come January 21, 2019?

    1. avatar mark s. says:

      The skuddlebutt I’ve been hearing is old Barry has two jobs lined up and they’re competing for his services of polishing the insides of their cabinets .
      I heard that these were the companies wanting his services :
      Kabets Joinery P/L
      PT Jaya Himan Sentosa
      I don’t know , just what I’ve been hearing around here .
      Must be into furniture manufacturing or woodworking or something , I never knew ?

  9. avatar ready,fire,aim says:

    God this is going too be a long 12 months, 14 days, 12 hours, 33 minutes…………..

    1. avatar FlamencoD says:

      And then when Hillary takes over, it will be even worse (or at least as bad). I don’t see how any of the Republican candidates will beat her, the Dems have too many bought and paid for automatic votes. I hope I am wrong.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I just hope she will be nominated before her trial begins, it would be so much fun to see her trying to campaign outside the courthouse during recesses. And people would STILL vote for her!

  10. avatar Frank says:

    The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:

    “I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

    “I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.” (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.

    Says it all.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Mine skipped from “I, (state your name)” directly to “do solemnly swear (or affirm)”, the rest was the same. That was in the spring of 1969. Dunno when the other meaningless garbage was tossed in.

      1. avatar Frank says:

        When I joined in 1982, the or affirm was included. I don’t know when it was added though.

  11. avatar Tex300BLK says:

    Apparently he really doesn’t want Hillary to be president.

  12. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    “Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s senior adviser who also attended the meeting with Bloomberg Wednesday, said this week that the executive orders would be revealed in “short order,” but refused to offer any more detailed timelines.‎”

    Well, there’s that name, Valerie Jarrett, yet again.

    Is she actually running the country?

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      She seems to be involved in just about every decision made by this president so as Everett put it, she’s the power behind the throne, so to speak.

      1. avatar mark s. says:

        Like Mrs. Baylock always took good care of Damien . VJ is a wonderful caretaker of BHO.

    2. avatar dph says:

      To answer your question, probably. They owe her.
      From Wikipedia, “”In 1991, as deputy chief of staff to Mayor Richard Daley, she interviewed Michelle Robinson for an opening in the mayor’s office, after which she immediately offered her the job.[30] Michelle Robinson asked for time to think and also asked Jarrett to meet her fiancé, Barack Obama. The three ended up meeting for dinner. After the dinner, Michelle took the job with the mayor’s office, and Valerie Jarrett reportedly took the couple under her wing and “introduced them to a wealthier and better-connected Chicago than their own.” She later took Michelle with her when she left the mayor’s office to head Chicago’s Department of Planning and Development.”

    3. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Well, there’s that name, Valerie Jarrett, yet again.

      Is she actually running the country?”

      I can’t tell if that was snark or not.

      The answer is, *yes*.

      In a nutshell, the only way to get to Obama is through Jarrett.

      Google her name, there are a number of analysis on her that explains her methodology.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        “I can’t tell if that was snark or not.”

        Not snark.

        It was a rhetorical device to pique the curiosity of those that might not have discovered

        “The answer is, *yes*.

        In a nutshell, the only way to get to Obama is through Jarrett.

        Google her name, there are a number of analysis on her that explains her methodology.”

        on their own yet.

        {thumb’s up for being more explicit and direct than I was}

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Absolutely. And for those unaware, she was born in Iran. Work on it.

      1. avatar mark s. says:

        DAMN those Wiley Persians .
        Waskley wabbits .
        She looks soo Jewish .
        Mrs. Baylock .

  13. avatar Another Robert says:

    Other folks have touched on it already: how many times have we said it here: “there is no gun-show loophole”? I’m thinking that this is one of those times when liberal talking points run smack into reality. How do you write an actual, specific regulation with actual specific parameters to address a situation that doesn’t exist, without going all draconian and inviting a legal challenge you will likely lose? I’m thinking that’s why Valerie and her dummy are being so coy as to when the EO(s) will come out.

  14. avatar David P. says:

    Even he knows his range is limited with EOs.

    My guess is that they will try to redefine what constitutes a gun dealer. The guys that post stuff on social media (Facebook, Craigslist, armslist) frequently or the guys that carry guns into a gun show to sell will be the ones who get caught up in this. They will claim they are a gun dealer because they sell (whatever number they make up) a year so they need to have a FFL.

    I don’t sell mine very often and when I do it is to someone I know and I typically buy new so this doesn’t affect me much. That is not to say that it doesn’t bother me, just doesn’t affect me.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Interesting concept. Let’s remember that in the early ’80’s, the big push was to reduce the number of FFLs, aiming at you not being able to find anyone who could sell you a gun. I’d be kinda surprised if they would now try to get MORE FFLs, though I admit I have thought of trying to get a Class 3 license, so I could play with all the shiny new toys.

  15. avatar Bdk NH says:

    I am not a big fan of television drama but have been having a few marathon sessions while traveling with “House of Cards.” The plot lines and events are ridiculously oversimplified and unrealistic. However, I suspect that the thing that they have nailed is how petty, narcissistic, conniving, and out right criminal politicians are at the highest levels. They have to be to get where they are.

    There is no doubt in my mind that the “rulings” in the last year of Obama’s presidency are going to massively exceed precedent, test the limits of the Constitution, and possibly compromise the Union. Time will tell.

  16. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    We have a simple, inexpensive, zero-risk, and (in my opinion) wildly effective option at our disposal should Obummer issue an illegal/unconstitutional executive order that violates basic decency much less the Second Amendment. People estimate that 100 million homes have firearms in the United States. If just one out of every 100 of those homes would write a letter of disapproval and send it via Certified U.S. Mail with signature required to Obummer’s official office address, Obummer’s staff would be forced to deal with 1 million certified mail letters over the course of a few days.

    Think about it. How many U.S. Mail trucks will be necessary to transport 1 million certified letters? How will staff sign 1 million letters? If each signature takes 30 seconds and a staffer works an 8 hour day, each staffer would only be able to sign 960 letters per day. If 100 staffers were available to do nothing more than sign for certified mail, it would take them 11 days just to receive all of those letters. And where would they put 1 million envelopes? How would staffers open and screen all of them? (Since all letters arrive certified mail, any of them could be important legal documents.) Now imagine doing this once a month while Obummer refuses to rescind the illegal/unconstitutional executive order.

    This is so easy and inexpensive to do. And I believe it would be wildly effective. And yet, to date, I am not aware of anyone doing this.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I like it, count me in. Why not once a week? And I will add copies to my congressman and both senators into the mix for good measure. I’d guess that would shut down the Post Office in DC for the duration, it would be difficult for the media to hide. The trick would be coordinating the date.

    2. avatar Ryan says:

      Oh, this is just too evil an idea to not stand behind.

      Count me in.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people peaceably … to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

        So many people fail to recognize just how powerful the First Amendment can be if exercised en masse — like I suggested above.

        When Illinois proposed banning military-style semi-automatic rifles about three years ago, didn’t the people of Illinois manage to seriously rattle their state government with nothing more than a few thousand standard mail letters and phone calls? Imagine that effort amped up to 1 million letters certified mail once a month until acquiescence?

        1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

          THAT and 3000people showing up in Springfield in very short order uncommon… It was THIS that politicized my gun ownership. BTW anyone see Valerie Jarrett’s college yearbook pro-muslim thing making the rounds on social media??? I’d like to know if it was real and not vapor-ware…

    3. avatar ACP_arms says:

      I’m squirming in my seat as i read that. It’s wicked… i like it!

    4. avatar mark s. says:

      In real world maybe , but I’m sure Barry could give a flying FULK if Americans sent in a billion Certified letters , he would just hire a bunch of do nothings to sort through them and forward it all to Utah . He relishes confusion , he is confusion . He wants anarchy , Cloward and Piven stuff .

  17. avatar MiniMe says:

    Those 2 together? Perfect example of a Communist Politburo.


  18. avatar TX Gun Gal says:

    What no “on-line purchase” loop hole?

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      That’s the one I would like to get the “news”hounds and the grabbers that the “news”hounds quote to try. Just once, let one of them actually go online on-the-air just to show how “easy” it is: “Here you are, Ms. Soto-Lamb, I just used this laptop to buy a pair of shoes and have it delivered to this address. You go online and do the same thing with a gun. Here is the news division’s credit card, when you get to that point I’ll fill in the number…and i’ll fill in the delivery address when you get to that point.” “Wellllllllll…”

  19. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Whatever emperor mom jeans does will energize the good guys like nothing else-gun salesboy of the millennium…yep he really does hate hildebeast Tex.

  20. avatar Bob R says:

    Did he bring someone from the other side to hear what they have to say?

    (I’m sure he didn’t)

  21. avatar Colt Magnum says:

    Bloomberg’s sock puppet, Shannon, must be lonely. Looks like he’s acquired another sock puppet in Obama.

  22. avatar shootboot says:

    ya they always go on about gun shows. most gun guys i kno and me hate gun shows. never find anything and ur surrounded by muzzle waving mouth breathers

  23. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Images like that one up there will only cause more AR-15s to disappear from retail inventory.

    I guess I’ll have to wait another year.

  24. avatar anomad101 says:

    Vote like your life depended on it.

  25. avatar mark s. says:

    Mikey Humperdick
    Bloomington Elglebert
    I can’t remember his name exactly , but didn’t the NY mayor use to sing .
    When he gazes into Barrack’s eyes he thinks , you’re just to good to be true , I can’t take my eyes off of you and when Barrack walks away he screams , there goes my everything and when Barrack returns , Mikey ask , what now my love ?
    Kinkleberk Humpadick , something like that .

  26. avatar Damion cocchi says:

    Tyrants meeting with tyrants, to discuss enacting unconstitutional laws and illegal executive orders, to be enforced by other government tyrants

  27. avatar Gearmoe says:

    Make sure your memberships are up to date, we are going to need a huge legal war.

  28. avatar ButtMunch says:

    Prediction: if Bloomberg and Obama try to further restrict access to firearms in anyway… Neither will live to see who the next president is. With a >50% chance that someone on the “inside” does the job.

  29. avatar Frank says:

    I don’t understand how an executive action would be meaningful. What could the clown in chief actually do ?

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Worst case scenario that I can think of: rule that no AR-style rifle qualifies for the “sporting purposes” bit of the importation regulations. These guys are crafty though . . .

  30. avatar Mark Lloyd says:

    I don’t really care what he does. Trump is going to be the next president and he won’t hesitate one bit to whip his pen out and undo Obamas dirty deeds once in office.

    1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

      So you trust the recent democrat?

  31. avatar foo dog says:

    Bloomberg is a bozo, a distraction, and perhaps the press given to him is to distract from Soros.

    John Podesta, Bubba’s former chief of staff, and now HRC’s campaign manager, ran Soro’s “Center for American Progress”, a network of literally hundreds of networked entities, some shells to conceal ownership and activity to fund and influence progressive agendas.

    They are working at the state level, grass-roots up. Thats what works. Keep an eye peeled for what you dont see broadcast by the left, to trade up the chain.


    Follow the money:

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email