Author: TXGRStaff

July 17, 2024 

On Thursday night, Joe Biden parroted a commonly repeated lie, used time and again by Leftists to fearmonger the American people into willful submission of their right to self-defense.

Biden falsely claimed that guns are the #1 cause of death for children in America. “More children are killed by bullets than any other cause of death,” the President asserted to a room of reporters and journalists. This is, of course, not the first time that Biden has uttered this frequent falsehood. Biden first said that “guns are the number one killer of children,” earlier in his presidency on June 2nd, 2022.

Presumptively, the Biden Administration is referring to a CDC figure showing that the amount of people ages 0-19 who died from gun violence in 2020 is 4,368, surpassing even car crashes which totaled 4,036. As evidenced, this figure includes military and voting aged people of 18 and 19 years old, skewing the figure and misrepresenting the category of “children.”

Deaths caused by firearms for the ages 0-17 in 2020 were equal to 2,281, while car crashes for the same age group totaled 2,503. Clearly, Biden and the Democrats are deliberately misrepresenting the figures in order to fearmonger support for increasingly restrictive gun policy.

Any number of children dying from guns is cause for concern, however it should be recognized that the vast majority of these deaths occur in either Democrat run urban centers with restrictive gun laws, or in so-called “gun free zones.” 

No matter what lies and deceitful tactics the gun-grabbing Radical Left throws our way, Texas Gun Rights will continue fighting preserving our Second Amendment rights to self-defense. The fear mongering displays put on by the White House and other tyrannical forces will not deter Americans in defense of their liberties.

July 12, 2024 

In a heated race for the U.S. Senate in Texas, incumbent Senator Ted Cruz is facing a formidable challenge from Congressman Colin Allred. Both candidates reported significant fundraising hauls for the second quarter of 2024, with Cruz raising $12.6 million and Allred closely trailing with $10.5 million. Allred’s fundraising performance outpaces the totals of 2018 Democratic candidate Beto O’Rourke at the same point in his campaign.

Cruz’s fundraising total broke all his previous records, more than doubling his first-half 2018 performance. “We continue to see growing support for Senator Cruz in every corner of the Lone Star State,” said Nick Maddux, Cruz’s campaign spokesman. “This quarter’s record-breaking fundraising numbers are indicative of Texans’ steadfast support for Senator Cruz, but the job isn’t done yet. Senator Cruz will continue working day in and day out to ensure victory in November to Keep Texas, Texas.”

Cruz’s total of $12.6 million includes contributions to his campaign account, his super PAC, joint fundraising accounts, and donations itemized for him by the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Texas GOP. With an average contribution of $33.25, Cruz’s campaign shows widespread grassroots support across all 254 counties in Texas, bringing his cash on hand to $22.1 million at the close of the period.

On the other hand, Colin Allred’s campaign has amassed a total of $38 million since its inception, with an average donation of $33.59. Allred’s $10.5 million second-quarter haul slightly exceeds Beto O’Rourke’s fundraising total for the same period in 2018, a notable feat considering O’Rourke’s strong financial backing during his campaign. Paige Hutchinson, Allred’s campaign manager, emphasized the significance of this achievement. “Texans are sending a clear message to Ted Cruz that they are ready to move on from him and his policies that are hurting Texas families, and that they are ready to elect Colin Allred to bring a new generation of leadership to the Senate.”

Allred’s campaign is heavily backed by the gun-control lobby. Endorsed by Giffords, a prominent gun control advocacy group, Allred has centered his campaign on the promise of implementing stricter gun control measures. This endorsement is part of a broader strategy by anti-gun groups to make significant inroads in Texas, a state traditionally known for its strong gun rights stance.

The involvement of influential figures such as George Soros further underscores the intensity of the effort to flip Texas blue. Soros and other gun control advocates are significantly ramping up their financial support in Texas, aiming to turn the state into a Democratic stronghold. With significant funding funneled into the state, groups like Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords are tripling down on their efforts to reshape Texas’s political landscape.

The race between Cruz and Allred is not just a contest of political ideologies but also a battleground for the future of gun rights in Texas. Cruz, a staunch defender of the Second Amendment, represents a traditional pro-gun stance, while Allred’s campaign, bolstered by gun control advocates, pushes for more restrictive firearm laws.

As the November election approaches, both campaigns are expected to ramp up their efforts, with even more significant fundraising hauls likely in the coming months. The outcome of this race could have far-reaching implications, not only for Texas but for the national conversation on gun control and Second Amendment rights.

Texas Gun Rights is mobilizing its members across the state to make gun rights—and stopping Biden’s anti-gun agenda—a winning issue in November.

July 15, 2024 

In a shocking turn of events on Saturday, former President Donald Trump narrowly survived an assassination attempt during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.

The attack, which tragically resulted in one death and left two others injured, has highlighted severe security deficiencies and raised critical concerns about the radical left’s inflammatory rhetoric.

The shooter, identified as 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, managed to climb onto a manufacturing plant approximately 130 yards from where Trump was speaking.

From this elevated position, Crooks fired multiple shots, grazing Trump’s right ear, killing an innocent attendee, and wounding two others before Secret Service snipers took him down.

The incident has sparked widespread outrage and questions about how such a significant security lapse could occur.

Israeli Special Ops veteran Aaron Cohen, speaking to Fox News, articulated the gravity of the situation: “God must have been watching over the president.”

Cohen noted that snipers are trained to aim at the cerebral cortex to ensure a fatal shot. “At 130 yards, it’s not a difficult shot to make,” Cohen stressed, underscoring the serious security failings that allowed Crooks to position himself and fire at the rally.

Eyewitnesses reported seeing Crooks with a visible rifle as he climbed onto the building and frantically tried to alert authorities.

One witness told the BBC, “We could clearly see the rifle. I was wondering why Trump was still speaking and why he hadn’t been pulled off the stage. We were pointing at the shooter for what felt like minutes before the shots rang out.”  This testimony raises serious questions about the Secret Service’s preparedness and response.

Images of a bloodied but defiant Trump raising his fist as he was escorted off stage have quickly become iconic, potentially boosting his chances in the upcoming election. Entrepreneurs have already capitalized on the moment, selling merchandise featuring this dramatic image.

Following the attack, a congressional oversight committee has demanded a hearing with Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle to address these glaring security issues.

Meanwhile, conspiracy theories abound, with some left-leaning voices suggesting the attempt was a right-wing plot to martyr Trump, while some right-leaning voices allege that the Biden administration deliberately reduced Trump’s security detail.

This incident must be seen within the broader context of the radical left’s hostile and aggressive rhetoric.

For years, the left has demonized their political opponents, fostering an environment conducive to violence. This strategy was evident when Maxine Waters urged leftists to confront Trump supporters and Cabinet members publicly, and when leftists harassed political figures in public spaces.

Incidents such as Kathy Griffin’s infamous photo with a severed Trump head, Snoop Dogg’s video depicting a mock assassination of Trump, and a New York play portraying Trump as Julius Caesar being stabbed all exemplify this dangerous trend.

More recently, Joe Biden’s inflammatory remarks about Trump, labeling him a “threat to democracy” and metaphorically placing him in a bullseye, have further fueled this divisive climate.

Comparisons of Trump to Hitler and derogatory labels for his supporters, such as Nazis, only exacerbate the situation. Biden’s Constitution Hall speech, Hillary Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” comment, and Obama’s remark about people clinging to “guns and religion” have all contributed to this toxic environment.

The leftist media’s attempt to create a false moral equivalency by repeatedly referencing January 6 while ignoring the violent acts committed by groups like Antifa, BLM, and Jane’s Revenge is misleading.

Their strategy, rooted in Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals,” relies on intimidation, coercion, and violence.

Tragically, leftists have made enemies of anyone opposing their agenda, making an assassination attempt on Donald Trump seemingly justifiable to them. They seek to rationalize such actions through distorted narratives.

Yet it is these same far-left Democrats who are the loudest voices pushing for stricter gun control measures, aiming to disarm law-abiding citizens while stirring up a pot of violence.

The hypocrisy is glaring. On one hand, they incite aggression through their rhetoric and actions; on the other hand, they seek to strip away the constitutional rights of Americans to defend themselves.

This disarmament leaves citizens vulnerable while the left continues to fan the flames of division and hostility.

But in the wake of this assassination attempt, it is crucial to address not only the immediate security lapses but also the broader implications of disarming the public.

Law-abiding citizens must retain their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves in an increasingly volatile environment fueled by radical rhetoric.

The push for gun control under the guise of safety is exposed as another tactic to consolidate power and weaken opposition.

July 15, 2024 

Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, has withdrawn his request for a new trial in his federal gun case after federal prosecutors criticized his legal approach as a “misunderstanding of appellate practice” and for neglecting prior court orders.

On June 11, Hunter Biden was convicted on three counts related to lying about his drug addiction to obtain a firearm. He filed a motion for a new trial on June 24, claiming that Delaware federal Judge Maryellen Noreika lacked jurisdiction over his trial. Biden argued that there were pending rulings in his appeals case that called Noreika’s authority into question.

Federal prosecutors from special counsel David Weiss’ office refuted Biden’s argument, emphasizing that the Third Circuit Court of Appeals had already authorized Judge Noreika to proceed with the trial. In a filing on Monday, prosecutors pointed out that the appeals court had dismissed Biden’s appeals with orders marked “Issued in Lieu of Mandate,” a crucial detail that Biden and his legal team failed to acknowledge.

Prosecutor Derek Hines wrote in the Monday filing, “When trial began on June 3, the Third Circuit had already dismissed both of the defendant’s appeals with orders stamped ‘in Lieu of Mandate’ and denied his petition for rehearing.” He added, “While the defendant repeatedly insisted before trial that his appeals divested this Court of jurisdiction, this is the first time he has spun this tale of the missing mandates.”

Hines made it clear that the dismissal orders provided no grounds for the court to reconsider its previous rulings, as the orders indicated that the appeals were non-appealable and did not affect the court’s jurisdiction.

Following this, Hunter Biden’s lead attorney, Abbe Lowell, filed a brief on Tuesday admitting the oversight. “As it appears that the Third Circuit views issuing a certified order ‘in lieu’ of a mandate as compliant with … procedure for shortening the time for issuance of a mandate, Mr. Biden withdraws his motion,” Lowell wrote.

Hunter Biden, a notable figure in his father’s administration following President Biden’s controversial June 27 debate against Donald Trump, faces up to 25 years in prison when he is sentenced later this year. However, federal sentencing guidelines suggest he is unlikely to receive the maximum sentence. Judge Noreika has yet to set a sentencing date.

Biden’s legal challenges do not end here. He is scheduled to go on trial on September 5 in Los Angeles, where he is accused of evading $1.4 million in taxes from 2016 to 2019. An earlier attempt to delay this trial was rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in May, with prosecutors calling the appeal a “stunt to delay his trial.”

Public opinion is not in Biden’s favor. A recent poll by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research revealed that 60% of Americans, including 59% of Democrats, agreed with the verdict in the Delaware trial, with nearly half supporting a prison sentence for Hunter Biden.

As these legal proceedings continue, the implications for the Biden administration and the wider political landscape remain to be seen.

July 3, 2024

The Supreme Court declined to review National Association for Gun Rights v. Naperville, allowing the case to move forward in the lower courts. The U.S. District Court previously denied a preliminary injunction to block a law affecting gun owners, a decision upheld by the 7th Circuit. This ruling, which controversially stated that AR-15s are not protected by the Second Amendment, stands despite strong opposition from Justice Clarence Thomas.

Thomas criticized the 7th Circuit’s decision as “nonsensical,” arguing that AR-15s, as widely owned semi automatic rifles, are indeed “Arms” under the Second Amendment. He emphasized the importance of the Supreme Court reviewing this decision if it returns in a final judgment posture.

Hannah Hill, Executive Director for the National Foundation for Gun Rights, expressed frustration, stating, “Today’s decision tells the lower courts they’re more than welcome to trample Bruen to their hearts’ content – at least for the time being. For now, the Second Amendment IS a second-class right until the Supreme Court decides to stop ducking the issue.”

Dudley Brown, President of the National Association for Gun Rights, echoed this sentiment, pointing out that the Supreme Court’s inaction effectively delays justice for gun owners. “Justice Thomas just told the nation that the 7th Circuit got it wrong when it ruled that AR-15s – the most commonly owned rifle in America – is not a gun at all under the Second Amendment. They better get used to hearing from us because we will keep bringing ‘assault weapons’ ban cases until they get it right.”

The Supreme Court’s reluctance to address this critical issue leaves many Second Amendment advocates concerned about the future of gun rights in America. As the legal battle continues, organizations like the National Association for Gun Rights remain dedicated to challenging laws that infringe upon constitutional freedoms. This ongoing struggle underscores the importance of vigilance and persistent advocacy in defending the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment.