Republicans Making Noise About Biden's Export Ban on Guns and Ammo

[TrappedinCalifornia]

US House lawmaker threatens subpoena over firearms documents

...Representative James Comer, chair of the U.S. House of Representatives Oversight Committee, who had asked Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo for documents and communications on Nov. 28, said in a letter on Friday that the department has failed to provide any documents or hold a substantive briefing.

Comer set a new deadline of Jan. 26 for Commerce to produce documents or face a potential subpoena.

The Commerce Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The pause is due to end around Jan. 27, at which time Commerce could decide to make the halt on export licenses permanent, return to previous practices, or impose other permanent restrictions...

His letter to Raimondo can be viewed... Here.

What it boils down to is... "We told you to put up and you've ignored us. Here's the new deadline and if you don't meet it, we'll consider sterner measures."

In other words, I call it 'making noise' because, for now, it's a 'sternly worded letter.'

Do we really think it will turn into more than that and/or that the Biden Administration will truly respond appropriately?

[WOODY2]

Ask once, cc the Pres and if no response drop the hammer.

[AlmostHeaven]

Considering that the Democratic Party controls both the White House and the Senate, I have my doubts whether the House of Representatives alone can fix this situation.

[M76]

Considering that the Democratic Party controls both the White House and the Senate, I have my doubts whether the House of Representatives alone can fix this situation.

Plus they're more openly maoist than any point in modern history I'm aware of

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Considering that the Democratic Party controls both the White House and the Senate, I have my doubts whether the House of Representatives alone can fix this situation.

I don't think anyone truly expects a 'fix' at this time. As you indicate, there's just not enough 'power.'

With that said, what they do expect is a meaningful fight. Not just 'sternly worded letters,' but an actual push back. Even if it just slows things down, that would be something.

Remember, a big part of Biden's motivation is that his supporters are demanding action, not promises. With his numbers 'sagging,' he'll be looking to bolster support wherever he has to. In short, it's an election year and that gives 'our side' a few cards and chips to play in the game.

[AlmostHeaven]

I don't think anyone truly expects a 'fix' at this time. As you indicate, there's just not enough 'power.'

With that said, what they do expect is a meaningful fight. Not just 'sternly worded letters,' but an actual push back. Even if it just slows things down, that would be something.

Remember, a big part of Biden's motivation is that his supporters are demanding action, not promises. With his numbers 'sagging,' he'll be looking to bolster support wherever he has to. In short, it's an election year and that gives 'our side' a few cards and chips to play in the game.

You raise a fair point. I certainly agree that the House of Representatives should attempt to obstruct the Biden administration in any way possible.

[DentonandSasquatchShow]

Ask once, cc the Pres and if no response drop the hammer.

This would be a fine tactic if we had a Republican party that worked uniformly together. But they don't so nothing will happen. Like everything else the R's need to put a stop to they need to just defund it all until the Biden admin starts following the rules. But again, not going to happen.

[BAJ475]

This would be a fine tactic if we had a Republican party that worked uniformly together. But they don't so nothing will happen. Like everything else the R's need to put a stop to they need to just defund it all until the Biden admin starts following the rules. But again, not going to happen.

I agree. The first thing that I would defund is the BATFE. No enforcement of the NFA and the 1986 ban on new machine guns, no federal tax on alcoholic beverages and no restrictions on home distilling on up to 50 gallons per year.

[Featureless]

Republicans do a lot of talking. That's about it.

[BAJ475]

Republicans do a lot of talking. That's about it.

That is why I call myself a conservative rather than a Republican.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

That is why I call myself a conservative rather than a Republican.

I did the same thing, years ago. However, I'm careful to make sure whomever I'm speaking to understands that my conservatism is an old-fashioned or 'traditional' conservatism (lower case 'c') and not the newer 'Conservatives' (upper case 'C'). The difference?

Traditional conservatives believe in small government. Newer 'Conservatives' lean toward Government being a means to an end.

I believe government has a role and is necessary. But, I believe that role is limited and the 'necessity' is related to keeping the playing field from become too tilted.

Traditional conservatives are closer to the original definition of 'liberal' than are modern 'Liberals.' Traditional liberalism is what formed the basis of our country, speaking to tolerance and inclusion. Modern Liberalism is more bound to agenda, speaking more to social control.

[Rickybillegas]

I did the same thing, years ago. However, I'm careful to make sure whomever I'm speaking to understands that my conservatism is an old-fashioned or 'traditional' conservatism (lower case 'c') and not the newer 'Conservatives' (upper case 'C'). The difference?

Traditional conservatives believe in small government. Newer 'Conservatives' lean toward Government being a means to an end.

I believe government has a role and is necessary. But, I believe that role is limited and the 'necessity' is related to keeping the playing field from become too tilted.

Traditional conservatives are closer to the original definition of 'liberal' than are modern 'Liberals.' Traditional liberalism is what formed the basis of our country, speaking to tolerance and inclusion. Modern Liberalism is more bound to agenda, speaking more to social control.

I believe most of the founders vision and the construct of the constitution and the bill of rights was that government was a necessary evil. Without would be chaos, but as a necessary evil, limited in it's scope and with many checks on government power. Which in my opinion is what made it so revolutionary.
Nothing like it before in history and least codified. Now we've used the courts, our elected leaders and we ourselves have followed all the pied pipers into an inverse of the original intent, hence a gigantic all pervasive government controlling every aspect of our lives. It was absolutely inevitable, but how glorious a vision it was even though it never came to full fruition.

[AlmostHeaven]

I believe most of the founders vision and the construct of the constitution and the bill of rights was that government was a necessary evil. Without would be chaos, but as a necessary evil, limited in it's scope and with many checks on government power. Which in my opinion is what made it so revolutionary.
Nothing like it before in history and least codified. Now we've used the courts, our elected leaders and we ourselves have followed all the pied pipers into an inverse of the original intent, hence a gigantic all pervasive government controlling every aspect of our lives. It was absolutely inevitable, but how glorious a vision it was even though it never came to full fruition.

At the heart of the problem lies the unfortunate fact that many people actually desire a form of government with vast powers to shape society into their own personal utopian image.

[Sgt Raven]

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."


― George Washington

[AlmostHeaven]

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."


- George Washington

Once again, the Founding Fathers comprehended reality with extreme clarity and wisdom.