Smoking Gun Shows The ATF Dishonesty In Responding to FOIA Request

ATF Agent NRA-ILA
Smoking Gun Shows The ATF Dishonesty In Responding to FOIA Request

WASHINGTON D.C.-(Ammoland.com)- New evidence shows that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is lying to journalists, lawyers, the public, and their own Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) department.

Earlier in the year, AmmoLand News obtained inside information from a source and a copy of the notes of a Director of Industry Operations (DIO) conference call that ATF employees on temporary detail to the NFA (National Firearms Act) division were not hitting target metrics. The NFA division is responsible for processing and approving tax stamps, processing NFA transfers, and adding new NFA items to the NFA registry. The exact metrics were not revealed on the call.

On my behalf, on March 1, 2021, my attorney, Stephen Stamboulieh, filed an FOIA request to get the exact metrics that the ATF uses for the NFA division. At the same time, another attorney, Robert Olson, filed an FOIA request to get the DIO notes from the call in question. AmmoLand News had a leaked version of the notes, so this request would show what the ATF would redact from the document.

The FOIA department responded to the FOIA request stating that the NFA division reported that it did not have metrics.

Stamboulieh responded back to the FOIA department that we actually already knew that these metrics existed because we had inside ATF information from the DIO conference call. He quoted directly from the notes and asked the FOIA department to go back to the NFA division and ask for the metrics again. The request to double was granted.

A few days later, The ATF’s FOIA Department returned the request that Mr. Olson submitted for the DIO conference call notes. The ATF must not have been aware of Mr. Olson’s connection to me or the AmmoLand New article about the leaked conference call because they provided a redacted version of the DIO conference call notes. Someone at the ATF redacted the portion of the notes regarding the NFA division’s metrics. This redaction was only days after my other FOIA request was returned, with no results found.

The ATF exempted the portion of the FOIA request dealing with the failure to hit targets of the employees on the temporary detail to the NFA division. Someone at the ATF redacted that section of the DIO conference call. The ATF said they redacted the information because revealing it “would disclose techniques and procedures for enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law.”

The redacted information does not deal with “enforcement investigations or prosecutions.” There is no risk that disclosing metrics of processing tax stamps could be used to circumvent the law. It seems like the ATF does not want the public to know the NFA division’s metrics and chose to mislead FOIA requestors about the existence of the metrics in question.

Furthermore, we believe that the ATF’s FOIA department was not involved in the coverup of the existence of the metrics. The FOIA department requests the information from the department in question on behalf of the requester and then relays it back to the requester. The department’s job is to act as a single point of contact for the public. They do not get to decide what the department hands over.

It isn’t clear why the ATF chose to be dishonest about the existence of the NFA department’s metrics, but it does call into question the honesty of other redactions in FOIA requests.


About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump

Subscribe
Notify of
120 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Laddyboy
Laddyboy
21 days ago

The “ATF/ATFE/BATFE” bureaucratic department was began by an “IRS” director, NOT Congress! Thus, the entire Bureaucracy of the mentioned department IS ILLEGAL. It MUST be EXPELLED, REMOVED, Divested of all duties, Dissolved. ALL of its “paperwork” MUST be DESTROYED or DELETED from EVERY governmental, NGO organization or office across America and AROUND the world!!!!!!!

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
21 days ago
Reply to  Laddyboy

@Laddy begun by and IRS director is correct. Illegal is not correct. Please note: Who or What is the BATF?     by Dan Meador.   B.A.T.F. from I.R.S.   On June 6, 1972 Acting Secretary of the Treasury, Charles E. Walker signed Treasury Order Number 120-01 which establishes the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. He did this with the stroke of his PEN citing, “by virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of the Treasury, including the authority in Reorganization Plan No. 26 of 1950.” He ordered the, “transfer, as specified herein, the functions, powers and… Read more »

Deplorable Bill
Deplorable Bill
21 days ago

“The RIGHT of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.’ The 2A refers to each American citizen of proper age, who is not in jail or the loony farm, as the militia. This denotes the use of military grade weapons and equipment. The 2A IS A RESTRICTION ON GOVERNMENT not the citizen. What the atfe is doing is unconstitutional at best, certainly criminal, tyrannical and treasonous. The atfe should be disbanded or regulated to a t. Those who have any hope in a pro communist department of justice are in la la land. They are going… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

Obviously the ‘AFT” is doing exactly what the President, Senate, and Congress intends to do. Disarm the citizens with the intent to intimidate or coerce the civilian population; to influence the policy of government by intimidation or coercion; and/or to affect the conduct of their government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping. The US is just another absurd, abusive, ambiguous, arbitrary, and apathetic constitutional republic controlled by one party, the racketeer influenced corrupt criminal organization known as the Democratic Party; like their counterparts in China, Cuba, Indonesia, Iran, Venezuela, and Vietnam. Yes. They all have representatives they pick to elect and… Read more »

John Dow
John Dow
22 days ago

The AFT lying? I’m shocked!

Not.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  John Dow
JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

Don
Don
19 days ago

Pathetic reuse of material.

OlTrailDog
OlTrailDog
22 days ago

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language: I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.” Ronald Reagan

Last edited 22 days ago by OlTrailDog
musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago
Reply to  OlTrailDog

One of the few things he got right.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago

Hey Lord Schart, you are a broken record. I am supprised that the message board hasn’t told you that it is a repeat of a repeat of the same crap you have posted on multiple occasions because you are incapable of an original thought.

Maybe the system might start catching your copy paste protocol soon. We can only pray.

from the druggie state of the USA, OreGONE.

OlTrailDog
OlTrailDog
22 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

Sure thing sir musicaltoot, and “Perfection is the enemy of the good.”. Oh, is that you Jesus? My bad I guess I spoke out of turn.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago
Reply to  OlTrailDog

By reading your response I think you disagree with me but oh well, that was the past and it is not worth arguing about. At least when Regan was president we weren’t falling apart like the demonrats said we were or like we are now.

Today, we need to be present and accounted for on all fronts because the demonrats are trying to blame everything on republicans and we can’t let that fly without argument.

Russn8r
Russn8r
22 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

Reagan got a lot of things right, but most of these were all talk – no action … like most Republicans. He talked a great game. As to what he actually did, he got too many things wrong that proved fatal: Mainly amnesty, which he pushed as a moral imperative, and massively cutting taxes without cutting any spending whatsoever. Embracing the “Laffer Curve” as a cake-&-eat-it-too prescription for killed the small government movement. Republicans still glow about how cutting taxes increases federal revenue. Republicans thought, why make the tough choices to cut spending, corruption & fraud when we can just… Read more »

Neanderthal75
Neanderthal75
21 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

Well I agree with much of what you wrote, you got it horribly, horribly wrong however when it comes to the issue of where the total national debt came from. Until Obama, the national debt was both affordable and could have been paid off over about a 10-year period. However, in a mere 8 years Obama convinced Congress to deficit spend $10 Trillion dollars. This doubled the national debt in a mere 8 years, it was in fact more money than had been spent on the National domestic side from the foundation of the country to the date that Obama… Read more »

Russn8r
Russn8r
21 days ago
Reply to  Neanderthal75

I’m jealous. Cheers from Calizuela (here for a few more months before bugging out of a 3rd-world Commie S-h0le that was beautiful when I was growing up). I’m for tax cuts, but Laffer (who donated to Cali’s failed 1983 handgun ban initiative) admits the “Laffer Curve” has two ends. Zero tax rate yields zero revenue. At some point cutting taxes cuts rev & hikes deficits. I don’t believe we were in that range, yet “Laffer Curve” tax cuts still caused ratcheting spending growth far larger than the revenue increases they yielded. Laffer missed the destructive, demoralizing psycho-political incentive dynamic of… Read more »

Last edited 21 days ago by Russn8r
musicman44mag
musicman44mag
21 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

I lost two homes in that mess and I blame it on the republicans but I did not vote for hussein. It amazed me that the demonrats said spend, spend, spend, it’s ok and the Rs were saying we cant afford it. Then President Trump get’s into office and the demonrats were yelling he is going to bankrupt America with all his spending and get us into a war. Lol, what idiots. I was concerned that obiden would get us into war because of his stupidity but I see now he is too busy kissing china and putans ass so… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
20 days ago
Reply to  Neanderthal75

In 2008 I looked at the historically highest revenue surplus of the US to calculate how long it would take to pay it off. Even then, it would take more than the lifetime of any living, if not more than 120 years. Presidents do not write the budget. All budgets are created in the House originally, not the White House. Read the Constitution, Article 1, Section 7:
All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Neanderthal75
Neanderthal75
22 days ago

How can anyone be surprised when one set of drones in a federal alphabet agency would be lied to by another set of drones in a federal alphabet agency? They all compete for greater budgets for their departments, which means they need to show results to give cause for their budgets to be increased. This means that lying on paper is the norm, lying to each other face-to-face within the ATF is the norm, and for the ATF to lie to Congress is a long established procedure. When Congress gets whatever information they are told then the professional Liars in… Read more »

Ram
Ram
22 days ago

If you get the metrics,
you might learn the recipe.
Once you learn the recipe,
you might ruin the Chef’s surprise.

Grim
Grim
22 days ago

Ah yes – government at it’s finest!!!

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
22 days ago

US Department of “Justice”. That’s a bad joke. They refuse to charge the POS that shot Ashli Babbett. That shows there is no more “justice”. If you want PEACE, seek JUSTICE. The whole federal gooberment is made up of one kind of person. Except for a VERY small group like Rand Paul…they are ALL PSYCHOPATHIC CONTROL FREAKS!

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

Don’t forget Ted Cruz. He stands strong on the second amendment and has taken a lot of flak for it.

Tionico
Tionico
22 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

Cruz tried to become President when he is not eliglible.. not a Natural Born Citizen and he knows it. I only trust him as far as I can throw him.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago
Reply to  Tionico

Are you mixing him up with Arnold Schwarzenegger who wanted to run?

OlTrailDog
OlTrailDog
22 days ago
Reply to  Tionico

Sorry friend, but it looks like you are a tad misguided on the eligibility of Ted to run for president. I would think as a lawyer who argued before SCOTUS his knowledge of his eligibility is a scooch above your opinion. Sure thing, no thanks needed, I’m simply glad to help out.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  OlTrailDog

Cruz’s mother, Eleanor Wilson, was born in Wilmington, Delaware. She is of three-quarters Irish and one-quarter Italian descent, and earned an undergraduate degree in mathematics from Rice University in the 1950s. His father was a citizen when he graduated from UT with a degree in mathematics and chemical engineering four years later in 1961 and Cruz was not born until 1970. A child born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions acquires citizenship at birth if at the time of birth: Both of the child’s parents are U.S. citizens; and​ At least one parent had resided in the United… Read more »

Russn8r
Russn8r
22 days ago

That does not make Cruz a natural born citizen. The framers relied on Law of Nations: Jus sanguinis AND jus solis. Cruz did not have jus solis. You can’t just statutorily change the meaning, not constitutionally anyway. McStain was natural born, Cruz was not. His renunciation of Canadian citizenship is also problematic. Never should’ve had it in the first place. Dual citizenship = dual allegiance and should be banned. The framers would not have allowed it.

Russn8r
Russn8r
22 days ago

What’s with the ridiculous “moderation” censorship again for God’s sake?

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

I moderated nothing and you do nothing for the sake of God.

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

Russn8r
Russn8r
21 days ago

Dial back on the mescaline, Schart.
Cruz is NOT a natural born citizen.

Last edited 21 days ago by Russn8r
JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
21 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

Finnky
Finnky
19 days ago

I am beginning too think that scharf is a bot. Constantly posting the same thing in response to posts where “his” reply makes no sense. Not to mention “thank you for down votes” posts. That was slightly funny the first time. Got annoying quickly. Now i’m wishing for a “block poster” functionality as seen on many other message boards.

APG member
APG member
19 days ago
Reply to  Finnky

Unfortunately that is not the case. I believe we are dealing with a mentally ill individual. We can only hope his OCD shifts gears. A simple google search reveals a ton of info non the monkey, I am surprise no one has doxed him…

Last edited 19 days ago by APG member
JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
21 days ago
Reply to  OlTrailDog

Not all of the “Founding Fathers” were born in America.. Every one of those who signed the Declaration of Independence were “Founding Fathers.” Two were born in England (Button Gwinnett, Robert Morris), two in Ireland (George Taylor, Matthew Thornton), two in Scotland (James Wilson, John Witherspoon), one in Northern Ireland (James Smith), and one in Wales (Francis Lewis). Some signers of the Constitution were not native born: McHENRY, James, a Delegate from Maryland; born in Ballymena, County Antrim, Ireland, November 16, 1753. HAMILTON, Alexander, a Delegate from New York; born on the island of Nevis, British West Indies, January 11,… Read more »

Last edited 21 days ago by JohnLloydScharf
Russn8r
Russn8r
21 days ago

Not all ‘Founding Fathers’ were born in America.”

So what? Doesn’t mean they were natural born citizens.

“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.”

The Constitution distinguishes between citizen & natural born citizen. The exception to Jus Sanguinis & Jus Soli was a grandfather clause allowing those who were already citizens (but not necessarily natural born) when the Constitution was adopted, to become President.

Stop smoking the strawmen, Schart.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
21 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

It means their definition of “natural born” is likely to be different than your assumptions about what that means.

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

Russn8r
Russn8r
20 days ago

No, ignoranus, it means they used the definition in Law of Nations, which was well known to the framers.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
20 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

It was written in French and the definition of “natural born” was not agreed on and the 14th Amendment can be cited as a change of that claim, troll. American Thinker Article of January 10, 2016, “Yes Ted Cruz Is A Natural Citizen” cites Georgetown Professor Randy Barnett . Randy Barnett, described as a Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Legal Theory at Georgetown University School of Law , writes in National Review, that Natural Born Citizen is based upon the concept derived from Britain of natural born subjects: “The term “natural born citizen” had no existence or independent original meaning prior… Read more »

Russn8r
Russn8r
18 days ago

The 14th doesn’t define natural born, Schart. Nice try.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
18 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

Nowhere in the Constitution is natural born defined, ignorant troll. If amendments like the 2nd over rule the original text on the powers of Congress, then the 14th Amendment over-rules the original text on natural born being a qualification for anything. Thanks for speaking up and removing all doubt you are a troll; again.

Russn8r
Russn8r
21 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

I’ll take Patriot Cruz over Paul any day. DONE with Paul after he lobbied congress to certify The Big Steal using sleazy Orwellian doubletalk & sophistry. e.g. “We shouldn’t overturn what the states did.” As if SOME states didn’t overturn what the people & OTHER states did. As if “the” states decided it’s ok for some states to steal elections from their own people & other states. As if Texas et al. didn’t object. As if refusing to certify wasn’t a valiant effort to turn the election right side up after Dems & RINOs overturned it.

Last edited 21 days ago by Russn8r
musicman44mag
musicman44mag
21 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

Wow, I just looked it up and the head line read “Paul calls voting for the overturn a mistake”. He was almost right but had it backwards. Now, I won’t support him unless I absolutely have too. Wonder if he will run against President Trump again if he runs.

from the druggie capital of the USA, OreGONE>

SGT_Wombat
SGT_Wombat
22 days ago

ATF should be a convenience store.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago
Reply to  SGT_Wombat

Shall we call the new store the Ammunition Tanks and Firearms store?

Big George
Big George
22 days ago
Reply to  SGT_Wombat

My doctor gave me a prescription for some ATF ointment for crotch itch…didn’t work.

RetUSAF
RetUSAF
22 days ago

Looks like the morons took over this comments section!

swmft
swmft
22 days ago

the freedom of information act was forced on government to stop abuses of power, well all it did was make them more creative liars. Lawyer and liar are synonymous twist meanings to fit their use, not as intended. the second amendment was meant to be an absolute,without government control that is why it takes the form of a commandment, it is written unlike everything else in the constitution or declaration of independence or even the articles of confederation the militia act made all able bodied males 18 or over members of militia all were to have their own gun we… Read more »

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
22 days ago
Reply to  swmft

^^^^^SOMEONE FIGURED IT OUT!^^^^^^^^

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
20 days ago
Reply to  swmft

Your propaganda about the militia is totally bogus. FIRST, the moment you say armed citizens are militia, then you put them totally under the laws of Congress: Section 8 – Powers of Congress The Congress shall have Power… To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; SECOND, neither the US Constitution nor the Articles of Confederation mention being… Read more »

normdvorak
normdvorak
22 days ago

Disband the ATF.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

What statute did the ATF violate? Where in caselaw did the US Supreme Court hold the ATF failed to uphold the law? None here have the power to “rescind” the NFA. There are no referendums or initiative powers in the US Constitution. You have no power or authority because this is a REPUBLIC; not a DEMOCRACY.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

SB 554 is the gun bill to protect criminals breaking into your home. A common theme this Session by the Democrat supermajority was criminals have a right to rob and perpetrate violence against defenseless citizens. Most of the police reform bills were pure meaningless virtual signaling simply telling existing police and prosecutors to better regulate themselves … ya right. SB 554 is an open attack on your private home per the staff measure summary. It takes effect in September. In theory police and deputies can raid your home without a warrant to seize firearms … that way criminals robbing, raping, and murdering will be safe. Not… Read more »

Rob
Rob
22 days ago

Will somebody please provide this ass hat crybaby a box of tissues so he can go off in a corner to sulk? What a dork!

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago
Reply to  Rob

He is a leftist elite law enforcement commie demonkkkrat from Portland OreGONE!!!!.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  Rob

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago

Lord Schart You are the problem my lying X prison guard that needs a carry permit in order to carry a firearm that worked at the capital building when the Kommiefornians came to OreGONE and you let them mess it up along with all your other buddies working in the capital with their BA/BS degrees and now you continue to be a problem on here with your stupid ideas that only people who served should have the right to vote and people imprisoned should loose that right forever which would result in the loss of another 2nd amendment supporter and… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
20 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

Russn8r
Russn8r
21 days ago
Reply to  Rob

At least his scharts are on burst-fire now instead of full auto, but that forces him to reply to himself.
“You talkin’ to me? Are YOU talking to ME? No one else here…”
LOL

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
20 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
22 days ago

This is a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC you who thinks he knows it all. VS a THEOCRATIC REPUBLIC. Look up the word DEMOCRATIC in the language it is derived from DEMOS=PEOPLE KRATOS=MAKES THE RULES.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

YOU do not make the rules. You do not get to redefine democratic or ignore the fact the people do not make the rules in a republic.

You have no vote on the rules in a republic.

Are you really that mind-numbingly propagandized with Doublethink that you still think your rulers or “representatives” in a republic are the people rather than rulers?

THEY have a vote. YOU DO NOT. A republic has  “elected representatives” with all the power; not the people.

Deny the reality all you want.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago

Right on, Lord Schart admonished me for referring to it as OrGONE and told me that I was in the wrong for doing that and that I don’t have the right because I was not born here. He hates that.

So said the Republican part of OreGONEia.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

You are not an adult. Personal attacks are the act of an adolescent who never lets facts, logic, or civility get in the way of trolling.

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

Russn8r
Russn8r
18 days ago

Do you even know you just called yourself a juvenile troll right there, Schartmaster?

Tionico
Tionico
22 days ago

ATF’s very existence has no basis in the US Constitution. They are a TAX agency. Since when did FedGOv have any level of authoirty over Alcohol Tobacco, OR Firearms? Not in MY copy of the COnstitutioin. Don’t forget, the “supreme law of the land” is defined as the US Constitution and alllaws enacted CONSISTENT with that document. NFA is not consistent as it INFRINGES upon our right to arms. Further, BATF have NO lwmaking powers, only the authority to enforce RULES made by administrative agencies, and any such rules that INFRINGE our right to arms are NOT law (see above… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  Tionico

WRONG! Congress has the power: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

buzzsaw
buzzsaw
22 days ago

I know why they’re so dishonest. They have to be. The very existence of an NFA division, and the firearms and explosives parts of BATFE are inherently dishonest. The NFA is unconstitutional, full stop. Any person employed doing any of the above, can not adhere to the oath that every last one of them took to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Not when their job is to do exactly what an enemy of the Constitution would do.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  buzzsaw

The NFA is Constitutionally created by the power given Congress in Article 1, Section 8. Full stop. Constitutional history and caselaw. You do not get to vote on how the Constitution is interpreted. The Constitution gave that power to the Supreme Court, not citizens. That is what it means to have a republic instead of a democracy.

APG member
APG member
22 days ago

Article 1 Section 8 gives congress those powers when one interprets your constitution like a commie…

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  APG member

So, you are claiming the Supreme Court are “commies.” Because the US Supreme Court disagrees with you then you claim they are “commies?” It is not MY constitution. At NO POINT did I vote for the US Constitution. No plebiscite was ever held to establish it; so it is not a constitution of the people. It never had the consent of the governed, which is unjust according to the Declaration of Independence. I do not interpret the constitution at all. This is the job of the Supreme Court, according to the constitution of this republic. You have ZERO authority to… Read more »

APG member
APG member
22 days ago

No Shart, I would say the supreme court is made up of politically connected lawyers; appointed because they think like commies. A non-commie interpretation would say it is EVERYONE’S job to interpret your constitution. Including the legislative and executive branches, the judiciary has usurped this power because of people like you! When I see all your incoherent posting, I think you are off your meds!

Patriot Solutions
Patriot Solutions
22 days ago
Reply to  APG member

They are all the 4th Reich, including Republicans with exception of a few. The media, congress, legal profession/courts, senate, agencies, medical, corp elite, Freemasons, Skull n Bones, other secret societies, Knights of this and Knights of that which by the way are right here now trying to defend their NWO. They are trying to talk us back into our cages, trying to keep a single piece of gun control to build it back upon, trying to keep either party or piece of either party to build back upon etc, etc, etc. They are here promoting the vax/depopulation and so on… Read more »

Last edited 22 days ago by Patriot Solutions
musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago

Thank you for the list. Glad to see South Dakota wasn’t on there or Montana. Heading out in a couple weeks to find land for a new home and a republican life unlike OreGONE has..

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

They do not need cages. You are free range slaves they can conscript with an act of Congress for any national service. Do you really think gun control exists? This is people control. It is intended to make the people afraid of the government. Slaves are not allowed weapons or a vote; just like they were not in Rome or Athens.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  APG member

ApugMember, I do not care what a dirt bag troll says. This is a republic, not a democracy. Not EVERYONE has a vote, AbsurdMember. Congress has a vote. The Supreme Court has a vote. AGAIN, ADildo, I do not interpret the Constitution; nor is it “EVERONE’S job.” It is NOT MY CONSTITUTION. I did not vote for it. NO ONE LIVING DID. The Supreme Court’s authority is written into the Constitution, ignorant child. They usurped NOTHING. Nada. Zip. Stop pretending I approve of the Supreme Court. I do not even approve the tyranny of a republic. You are brainwashed and… Read more »

APG member
APG member
22 days ago

Shart’s insane guide to the constitution. And just because I go in your mother every night does not mean I am a dildo!

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  APG member

Have you stopped raping children or do you still live with your mother, ApeMember. Do you think an ApeMember is more effective than a dildo with your mother?

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

It was sick of him to bring my mother into this. NEVER try to troll me with sick vulgarity or you will get a double dose back, you rotting afterbirth of a rat. NEVER make remarks involving my mother, you sick psychopath. Save your masterbatory fantasies for your sister. I am the son of my mother, not the furry bitch you sexually abuse from a kennel. You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. You must be ejaculating from this. Your… Read more »

Last edited 22 days ago by JohnLloydScharf
musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago

Proof that the truth always hurts. You poor baby, you got your feelings hurt. Time to go find a safe zone with your butt buddy prison guards and do unto others as they always do to you.

Get off his leg troll

OrGONEIA has spoken to Lord SCHART!!!!

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  APG member

By the way, you misspelling my name justifies my misspelling yours.

RetUSAF
RetUSAF
22 days ago

You related to George Scharf?

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  RetUSAF

Are you? What is your intent? To troll me about some George you know or troll some George you know? If I did would be private information not for public consumption, but just to keep an innocent party out of this, NO. Never.

Russn8r
Russn8r
18 days ago

Are you George Schart’s wife?

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago

He is to old and stupid with his infinite wisdom, knowledge and Oregoneian education to realize what we are saying. LOL

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

Like the little girl you keep in your van wrapped in tape? Stop whining when you get back what you throw out.

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  APG member

ApeMember, no one cares what you say. This is a republic; not a democracy. You do not have a vote on the issue of what interpretation is correct. NO it is NOT everyone’s job to interpret the Constitution this Constitution.

The judiciary did not usurp their power to interpret the Constitution. The Constitution CREATED their power. Your claim it did not is, in itself, UNCONSTIUTIONAL.

DO NOT CALL IT MY CONSTITUTION.
I did not vote in a plebiscite to give my consent.

Orion
Orion
22 days ago

the Constitution belongs to ALL american citizens, each one of us. the limits placed on government control under its first ten amendments (The Bill of Rights) applies nationwide; federally, state and locally.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  Orion

That is your delusion. The Constitution does not belong to ANY citizen. NO ONE LIVING voted for it. No amendment limits the powers of Congress. Only Article 1, Section 9 limits Congress. Congress can nullify every right with a tax or conscription. If all else fails, they can put a $1,000,000 tax on every firearm, every shell, and every component. If that fails to intimidate you, they an conscript you for national service for the rest of your life. Your worship of the Constitution is like Bible worship. Every Constitution worshipper believes because they have their own private interpretation. Then… Read more »

Orion
Orion
22 days ago

i suggest you try reading the 10th Amendment again only this time….. S. L. O. W. L. Y and out loud.
your attempt to discredit our Constitution is pathetic. lay off that cheap gin, okay? it’s not doing you any favors. lol.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  Orion

I suggest you stay off the LSD and read the Constitution in its entirety. You are deluding yourself. You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

Patriot Solutions
Patriot Solutions
22 days ago
Reply to  APG member

That’s true and if Ammoland will free my post below it goes into more detail.

buzzsaw
buzzsaw
22 days ago

And black is white, up is down and “…shall not be infringed” means limit it however you see fit. Yep.

Last edited 22 days ago by buzzsaw
JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  buzzsaw

It does not mean however you take it. Nor me. I would issue every responsible adult a submachinegun for concealed carry. It is, by law, interpreted ONLY by the judicial power given US Supreme Court by Article III – Section 1 – Judicial powers The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a… Read more »

Tionico
Tionico
22 days ago

Words have meaning, and meanings have consequences. Just because certain entities have changed, or attempted to change, the meaning of some words at the time the Constitutoin was drafted does not mean the intent of the Framers has changed. Go back and understand what certain words in commonusage in 1780’s meant then and in that setting. Try reading the Federalist Papers, the conventioin minutes, etc. Arms meant certain things in 1775, and it was THAT meaning they were using. Our current gummit wants to take a pice of inert plastic and define it as a “firearm under the meaing of… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  Tionico

The words in this case are written in the Constitution and those words are interpreted by the US Supreme Court, not any dead federalists. Arms always mean something, child. Your words would be considered seditious under the Adams administration. This “Constitutional Republic” has always been corrupt in denying the people their inalienable rights. No piece of paper protects your rights or even stops a bullet. Under the Sedition Act of 1798, you would have been put in prison for two years for opposing the government. ABSTRACT. SECTION I. Punishes combinations against United States government.  1. Definition of offence:Unlawfully to combine or… Read more »

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago
Reply to  Tionico

This dude is a demonkkkrat and they are masters at perverting the language from what it really means to their new definition. Just like Bureau of Land Management giving new meaning to BLMt because they cant think of anything original and use something familiar in the hopes that it gains recognition.

DHS: Department of Homeland Security or Department of Health Services.

WHO: World health organization or one hell of a rock band. .

Just like John Lord Schart. We all know what it really means but not him.. LOL

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  buzzsaw

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

JimmyS
JimmyS
22 days ago

You should read some founding documents again, you smug prick.

From where does a just government derive its power?

So yes, HOW I INTERPRET THE LAW IS PARAMOUNT.

They are not my rulers. I can take my ball and go home whenever I feel like it.

As soon as I perceive that people in government are openly and actively abusing their power, and denying my own ability to withdraw consent, it is my right and duty to abolish that government and destroy the abusers.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  JimmyS

READ THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS, if you can read, you childish troll. There is nothing smug about having to admit you live under a form of tyranny and if I prick your delusions to the contrary, so much the better. I have read the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution In NONE of them is your private interpretation of the law of the slightest consequence. You cannot withdraw consent because YOU NEVER GAVE IT. It was never ASKED of you. We agree on your right of a persons right to revolt AND that this government is run by… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  JimmyS

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
22 days ago

Lord Schart You are the problem my lying X prison guard that needs a carry permit in order to carry a firearm that worked at the capital building when the Kommiefornians came to OreGONE and you let them mess it up along with all your other buddies working in the capital with their BA/BS degrees and now you continue to be a problem on here with your stupid ideas that only people who served should have the right to vote and people imprisoned should loose that right forever which would result in the loss of another 2nd amendment supporter and… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

You sound like an anonymous troll intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating their perception with your inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, and off-topic comment. Your denial, dishonesty, and deflection are indisputably incontrovertibly conspicuously crystal clear-cut. You spout the same old narrative of endless inbred bloggers playing the telephone game with factoids and never-do-well high school dropouts who never learned how to discipline their thinking with facts or logic.

APG member
APG member
19 days ago

JonLordofShart: THE VIRUS INFECTING AMMOLAND DOT COM.

Russn8r
Russn8r
18 days ago
Reply to  APG member

Lord of the Scharts

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
22 days ago

Wrong. Any LAW that is REPUGNANT to the Constitution is null and void. Marbury Vs Madison. and we have a democratic republic. We would have been better off staying a monarchy because then you only have to deal with ONE psychopathic control freak and his enforcers instead of who the fuck knows how many and their enforcers.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

WRONG. You do not get to decide what is “REPUGNANT.” This is NOT a democracy. YOU do not have a vote on any issue. NO republic is democratic for that reason.. We have 537 psychopathic control freaks. There never was just one in any form of government and monarchies certainly were not an exception. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, established the principle of judicial review, by the Supreme Court, in the United States, meaning COURTS have the power to strike down laws and statutes that they find to violate the Constitution of the United States. NOT YOU. You do… Read more »

Tionico
Tionico
22 days ago

It does not take a court to decide whether “shall not be ifringed” means exactly what it says it mean,s r means somehting else. Note well: that language does not define or identify or restrict WHO may/may not do the proscribed infringing. It says, pure and simole SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Requiring a tax stamp as a preconditioin to possess something we already have clear right to possess is an infringement. Requiring an applicaion to get government permission to possess womthing I’ve already been clearly given the right to possess is another. Telling he how many in a given unit… Read more »

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  Tionico

Clearly, you assume you are above the law and assume the Court has no authority to determine the law. Luckily, you do not have a deciding vote. In fact, you have no vote at all on any federal issue. None. This is a republic; not a democracy.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
22 days ago
Reply to  buzzsaw

If they were honest with themselves they would have to shoot themselves as a punishment.

Patriot Solutions
Patriot Solutions
23 days ago

The government also classifies information to protect their crimes. They don’t want Americans to know that they are scammers and criminals who hide behind authority.

You can go read Trumps EO’s that address this stuff and today the entire government is being forced into compliance by the General, Pompeo and others.

APG member
APG member
23 days ago

Law Enforcement Agents acting dishonestly, nice culture y’all have cultivated!

Patriot Solutions
Patriot Solutions
23 days ago
Reply to  APG member

The governments criminal activities are protected by national security, well until Trump came along and built the new GITMO to put them in.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago

What an absurd lie.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
22 days ago

I’m pretty much convinced that is wishful thinking.

JohnLloydScharf
JohnLloydScharf
22 days ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

It is an absurd delusion. Trump did not build a new GITMO. GITMO is in Cuba because they assume rights to due process do not apply on land leased from Cuba. It is solely for foreign prisoners, most of which are captured terrorists. IN NO WAY did Trump create ANY new Prison. NONE. ZIP. NADA.

Russn8r
Russn8r
21 days ago

Lay off the hopium. Q is a government psyop.