SAF: Anonymous Whistleblower Claim Against Trump Is Like a Red Flag Order Against a Gun Owner

Trump Impeachment Whistleblower

Activists rally for the impeachment of President Donald Trump, at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., committed Tuesday to launching a formal impeachment inquiry against Trump. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

The current impeachment inquiry against President Trump is based on an anonymous whistleblower complaint lodged by an intelligence officer. That complaint and the Democrats’ impeachment push that resulted may have doomed any chance they had of getting a background check or red flag bill passed.

The Second Amendment Foundation looks at the anonymous complaint and the legal action that’s followed and sees a similarity to red flag laws that allow gun owners’ firearms to be confiscated based on the claim of, well, almost anyone in some states.

BELLEVUE, WA – The anonymous whistleblower complaint against President Donald Trump now being used by Democrats to launch an impeachment inquiry is tantamount to a “red flag” action against a gun owner, with the accused being presumed guilty until he or she can prove their innocence, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

“The lynch mob mentality now being exhibited by Capitol Hill Democrats is the same kind of rush-to-judgment thinking that courts and prosecutors use to rationalize seizing someone’s firearms, while throwing due process under the nearest bus,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Far-left House Democrats, who have wanted to remove the duly-elected president from office since the 2016 election are treating this anonymous complaint like gospel, virtually the same way the legal system treats a so-called ‘red flag’ complaint against a gun owner.

“Completely absent from this political circus act is anything close to skepticism,” he continued. “There’s a transcript of a telephone call between Trump and the Ukrainian president which Trump’s detractors read one way and his supporters read another way, and that’s about it. At least the president has the advantage of knowing there’s been a complaint filed, but in the case of a ‘red flag’ allegation, the gun owner typically doesn’t know a thing until police come knocking on the door. In either case, neither the president or an affected gun owner has had the opportunity to face their accuser.

“Many people are convinced that the president’s case amounts to political theatrics,” Gottlieb said. “However, there are no theatrics involved when a private citizen’s property is seized. As we saw last year in Maryland, a gun owner was served and something went wrong, and that person was shot dead inside his own front door.

“We’re not sure how this drama will play out against President Trump,” he noted, “but we do know that anytime an anonymous complaint can be used to launch something as serious as an impeachment inquiry, by the same people who are pushing ‘red flag’ laws against gun owners, it’s time to seriously re-think both processes.

“If this can happen to a president,” Gottlieb observed, “how long will it be before a ‘red flag’ case can be launched on the basis of an anonymous complaint? Step-by-step, it appears we’re getting closer to the kind of government the Second Amendment was designed to protect us against, and that’s alarming.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

comments

  1. avatar ROBERT Powell says:

    WHICH LETTER AGENCY DOSE THIS COMMUNIST WORK IN?????

    1. avatar Rincoln says:

      Best evidence I’ve seen points to disgraced CIA director John Brennan, who was fired by Trump for corruption and incompetence.

  2. avatar Alexander says:

    Kind of glad it happened this way. Maybe Trump will get the point. Maybe.

    1. avatar N says:

      I wish I could share your optimism. At least he’s been distracted.

  3. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

    The dems first bought a fake dossier on Trump from a foreign ex agent and then spent a few years and 40 million dollars on a bogus investigation. Trump just like Biden witholds money from the Ukraine to uncover a crime, Biden did so to hide a crime. Both are wrong, but the Democrats have shown, as with Kavanaugh that they are willing to do anything, legal or not to get Trump out. Let’s also never forget Clinton letting Americans die so she could keep trafficking firearms. Let’s also never forget Fast and Furious, basically ATF breaking the laws they are supposed to uphold. So Trump fights fire with fire, who’d a think it?

    1. avatar TickTalk says:

      The selective memory of the trumpism cultist is astounding. The Steele dosier was contracted and paid for by a right wing nut website, the Washington beacon of stupidity or something like that, through fusion gps. when they saw what was in it they ran away yelping like a little puppy.. the dnc had hired fusion GPS for some different research.. steeles firm only dealt with fusion GPS, didn’t know or care who was behind them. So the report got shopped over to the dnc, and they are like yeah we will take it.. pretty much the only unconfirmed part is the tape of trump getting peed on, though you know that will eventually come out..

  4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Being able to rush to judgement and avoid due process is a feature, not a bug.

    Say it with me one more time: Progressives operate on emotion, fantasy, and their whimsical (ever changing) notion of virtue.

    As a result Progressives:
    (1) do not care about facts
    (2) have no timeless standards of right-versus-wrong
    (3) consider you their political enemy if you disagree with them
    (4) advocate silencing, beating, imprisoning, and/or killing political enemies

    This is the cold and hard reality of Progressive adherents. Thus, Red Flag laws are simply a tool that Progressives will gleefully employ against their political enemies for political gain.

  5. avatar Ark says:

    Terrible take. SAF needs to STFU on subjects not directly related to firearms and firearms rights. Becoming a GOP advocacy organization is the trap the NRA fell into.

    1. avatar American Patriot says:

      Well dipshit there not a liberal organization. This is an all out war your either Anti-American or an American Patriot….How do you stand? The NRA got corrupt from people in power (Wayne) staying in power with no one to stop him….Just like the Liberals.

    2. avatar Defiant Deity says:

      How about you actually break down why it is a terrible take instead of crying about it like a progresssiveb1tch? Probably only consider it terrible because it doesn’t align with the propaganda the media and the left have been peddling to all you useful idiots?

      1. avatar DK says:

        I’m sure Ark isn’t going to have a hard time sleeping after you guys called him names. But I can’t imagine you helped anyone reading this gain a better understanding, either.

        To me, Terrible Take = Inadequate Analogy.

        Red Flag laws are garbage. I pray they never come to fruition nation wide. But nobody has seized President PeePee Grabber’s belongings or power. If the government came to take away all of his phones and computers, that would be analogous to proposed Red Flag laws.

  6. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    Reminds me of the Kavanaugh hearings.

  7. avatar WI Patriot says:

    “SAF: Anonymous Whistleblower Claim Against Trump Is Like a Red Flag Order Against a Gun Owner”

    Yeah, that’s a great analogy…

  8. avatar former water walker says:

    Puh-leese…this President is a reckless novice. This ain’t you in NYC wheeling and dealing-and getting sued 1000 times. NOTHING to do with our 2nd Amendment rights or any “red flag” BS. JFK used secret negotiations to stop the Cuban Missle mess. A lot of are on your side but I’m OK with a President Pence!

    1. avatar TickTalk says:

      Pence is a religious nutbag, but at least he will probably be somewhat honest, and have maybe a bit of patriotism in there somewhere.. Congress and the courts can keep the holy roller parts under control..

  9. avatar Swarf says:

    The last thing the Dems want to do is impeach Trump. They know it’s bad press. They know what happened to the Republicans after they impeached Clinton.

    But Trump is so goddamned corrupt, deceitful, incompetent and arrogant, he is basically forcing the Dems in to impeachment proceedings. At some point, they are forced to quit ignoring Trump’s shenanigans, no matter how much they would like to.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Yeah… how dare Trump become a target for commie delusions by being the best PotUS since Lincoln?

    2. avatar Anymouse says:

      He forced them to jump to impeachment based on hearsay from an anonymous witness, who may have political connection to previous Dem administrations? He forced them to jump by voluntarily releasing the transcripts, which show him to have not made funding contingent on the investigation? They wanted impeachment on the flimsiest excuse, and they got it. Prejudgment with no facts.

  10. avatar Dale Menard says:

    Anybody ever consider that Justice Ginsburg health is not too good right now and that she may pass away in the next few months. Democrats know this and want to have impeachment proceedings as a excuse not to consider Trump’s nomination to replace her vote on SCOTUS.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Fortunately, exactly zero Demokkkommies get a say as to SCotUS nomination considerations.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Dale Menard,

      What evidence do you have that Justice Ruth Ginsburg’s health is “not too good right now”?

      Sure, she had a cancer treatment — and the published reports say that she is in full remission and in good health. If you have credible reports to the contrary, please share those reports and their sources.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        I don’t believe reports of her health being that good. They said that in January of this year and 6 months later she’s in for a different cancer.

        At 86 she’s on borrowed time already. She’s a cancer magnet and it’s a matter of time.

        I’m wondering if some people know something we don’t and they feel an urgent need to remove him. Fast.

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          GS650G,

          We can speculate all day which is a waste of time and energy.

          Even if Ginsburg is prone to various types of cancer at this point in her life, experience tells us that she will almost certainly survive through the 2020 election and inauguration of the President of the United States in January, 2021 (which is only 15.5 months away).

          This notion that impeachment proceedings are tied to Ginsburg does not hold water. Impeach Trump today and Pence takes over tomorrow and appoints a conservative justice to replace Ginsburg. Or Democrats take the White House in 2020 and they appoint a Progressive justice to replace Ginsburg. Either way, impeachment does not change the outcome.

          So, why go through impeachment? Simply because Progressives operate on emotion, fantasy, and virtue. In their minds Trump is evil-incarnate and the virtuous thing to do is to impeach him! And Progressives are sooooooooo angry and wound-up that the joy of impeaching him is irresistible!

    3. avatar Dude says:

      I’d say that’s a good theory. It’s probably one of their long list of reasons, none of which involve violating the law.

    4. avatar strych9 says:

      “Democrats know this and want to have impeachment proceedings as a excuse not to consider Trump’s nomination to replace her vote on SCOTUS.”

      Eh. The House has nothing to do with confirmations. So yeah, they can try to throw sand in the gears with an impeachment proceeding which the Senate cannot ignore (regardless of what the idiotic comments on BB say about how cowardly McConnell is for pointing this out).

      However, the Senate being unable to ignore an impeachment charge could dispense with the proceedings rapidly. It took the Senate about a month and five days to deal with Clinton and that’s when the party holding the majority had a political reason, a desire and a legitimate charge against the guy to weigh. The trial took about a month and the verdict took three days to render.

      If that’s the best sand the House can come up with, especially considering the hit they’ll take for tossing it into the machinery, it’s a pretty shitty plan.

  11. avatar MK says:

    SAF (and implicitly, TTAG for sharing) seems to think that impeachment is a criminal proceeding. It’s not. It’s a political proceeding. Trump could murder someone in broad daylight, with cameras rolling, and even admit it – and yet he will remain in office unless 67 Senators vote to remove him.

    Additionally, by analogizing the right to bear arms with the office of the POTUS, SAF seems to believe that being President is a Constitutional right. It’s not. You cannot make a “right to due process” argument here. The process for impeachment is defined in the Constitution. End of story.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      A process that is blatantly ignored. Demokkommie buthurt does not fall under “high crimes and misdemeanors”

    2. avatar TickTalk says:

      Actually, no. Impeachment is only about removing him from office. The constitution says that impeachment shall not bar indictment, trial , judgement, and punishment according to law. Art I, s 3, c7.
      So any state can indict him… but would they? can you see some california or NY state cops showing up at the White House with an arrest warrant and extradition papers?

      1. avatar TickTalk says:

        Oops, forgot to add.. there is precedent.. DC cops arrested a sitting president for speeding reckless driving.. they probably left out the drunkenness part since this was Grant afterall… plead guilty and paid a fine.. but he was in the lockup for a few hours..

  12. avatar Cory says:

    “That complaint and the Democrats’ impeachment push that resulted may have doomed any chance they had of getting a background check or red flag bill passed.”

    This is assuming that the left will hold themselves to the same standard, which they won’t. They have proven, over and over, that they have a double-standard for everything. They don’t see due-process or our Constitution as rules or guiding principles, but instead as obstacles to be eliminated on their march towards Marxism.

  13. avatar Dude says:

    Red flags based on hearsay sounds pretty scary. If they can start an impeachment process on the President based on rumors, then I don’t think they’ll have a problem taking your guns for the same.

  14. avatar enuf says:

    “SAF: Anonymous Whistleblower Claim Against Trump Is Like a Red Flag Order Against a Gun Owner”

    I like the SAF and send them money each year at tax refund time. But this is bullshit. Following the whistle blower law is what we want people to do. Had Snowden or Manning done so, that would have been honorable, instead of the filthy treason it was.

    The Intelligence IG found it both credible and urgent. That means it checked out in multiple ways, at least several. By law, it had to be reported.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Actually, by law, he wasn’t a “whistleblower”… you can’t be a “whistleblower” when you have no personal knowledge of the events you are reporting. There is no obligation to release slander based on hearsay.

      1. avatar enuf says:

        False. There is no such requirement in the law and has never been a requirement in any regulation created under the law.

        Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community’s Statement on Processing of Whistleblower Complaints(September 30, 2019)
        https://tinyurl.com/y22t7ocp

  15. avatar GS650G says:

    Excellent point. Now Trump knows how it feels to be persecuted by enemies who hide behind walls and are taken at face value.

  16. Trump is accused of threatening to withhold funds iof the Ukraine government did not reopen a criminal investigation.

    How is that supposed to be wrong?

    1. avatar TickTalk says:

      No again… trump admitted to actually withholding funds until they manufactured an investigation into Biden based on conspiracy brain farts that had been debunked years ago. What he did was ask a foreign government for help in the 2020 campaign. Which is expressly against the law.
      If the Senate actually does its job for once and grow some balls, this is their chance to get rid of the dead hooker they handcuffed themselves to years ago and promptly lost the key..

  17. avatar Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says:

    That’s totally awesome. We don’t need evidence, we have hopes and feelings. We need to impeach Trump now, before the world ends in 12 years!

  18. avatar John in Ohio says:

    I’m not a fan of Trump as president but I do stand with him on this issue. This impeachment nonsense is baseless and an obvious attempt to villainize a sitting president. There is an unearned rabid hate for President Trump and it really shows in actions like this.

  19. avatar Jack says:

    >being able to send an anonymous tip to the police and the police investigating if the tip is deemed credible is totally the same thing as taking someone’s guns without due process

    That’s a massive stretch. Is this really the hill we want to die on?

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