Posts Tagged → tactical
What the new J6 weaponization fund means, to me
Two parts to this blog entry. First part is what the new January 6th (J6) weaponization fund for reimbursing victims of the weaponized Biden DOJ means to me. Second part is Roger Stone’s outstanding essay about this fund and its larger context, its background.
Part 1: What the new “Anti-Weaponization Fund” means to me.
While I am not one to tout my victim status, as if I have much in any case, the new reimbursement fund for J6 victims means something concrete to me. It means precisely $3,000, the amount I was unfairly forced to spend to have a competent attorney present when two FBI agents “interviewed” me about J6, several years ago.
Yes, I was at the January 6th, 2021 mostly peaceful protest out in front of the US Capitol in Washington, DC. Like a million other fed-up American citizens that day, I stood exactly where us peaceful protestors were supposed to stand that day: Out in front and around the sides of the building.
I did not break anything.
I did not hurt anyone or attack anyone.
I did not go inside the US Capitol, nor try.
All I did was peacefully stand out in front of the barricades, in the approved area, sing our National Anthem, sing God Bless America, chant “USA! USA! USA!,” and watch in horrified disgust as uniformed police officers illegally beat, pepper sprayed, gassed, bombed, and shot with rubber bullets myself and the peaceful protestors all around me.
I watched a police officer wearing black tactical gear walk up and down the barricades, leaning over them and clubbing peaceful protestors in the face, head, hands, shoulders, and arms with his baton. These American citizens had done nothing illegal or wrong or threatening. They were just standing there. The instigation and violence was all with the police.
I watched a handsome young man in a business suit, carrying an American flag and standing at the barricade, get shot point-blank in the face with a police-only explosive flash-bang grenade. His cleanshaven face was blasted white, and blood ran out of his eyes, nose, and mouth. He staggered backwards, unable to see, and then members of the crowd helped move him back, away from the ultra-violent police officers.
I watched dozens of events like this, got gassed several times and shot dozens of times with rubber bullets, before my friends and I called it quits and walked to where our chartered bus was waiting at Union Station. We rode home to Pennsylvania in mostly stunned silence. The raw and lawless evil we had just experienced out in front of the US Capitol was precisely the opposite of what is supposed to happen in our constitutional republic. We citizens are supposed to be able to peacefully assemble and petition the government with our grievances.
Instead, we were abused, beaten, hurt, antagonized by the very people paid to actually protect us. It was a shocking experience, which I wrote about the day after here on this blog.
And then a year and a half later, two FBI agents showed up at my home. One very butch lady named Melissa, and a forties-aged guy named Patrick Armor. I was not home, so Agent Armor engaged with my wife and two kids at home at the time. Yes, he said, they really wanted to talk with me. No, I had done nothing wrong on January 6th, but they really wanted to talk with me about things I may have seen.
My son asked Agent Armor if I had to contact him, and what would happen if I just ignored them.
“Oh, we will talk with Josh one way or another,” Agent Armor said, implying that the same wildly unreasonable official violence America was watching being used against all kinds of J6 victims could easily be brought to bear on me, too. You know, the 6AM dawn door-busting raid by 25 to 30 heavily armed federal agents in tactical body armor, grenades, and machine guns that so many other peaceful J6 protestors had been treated to.
A couple hours later I got a photo of Agent Patrick Armor’s FBI card, and I emailed him. He responded quickly, and encouraged me to just “talk on the phone” with him. Which of course was a huge red flag by then, as the Biden FBI and DOJ had been on a zero-due-process Stalinesque round-up of political enemies across America. A prospective victim like me just had to talk on the phone, the federal agent would lie about it, and make up something that would then justify arresting that innocent person, and then your life was over.
So I assured Agent Patrick Armor that I would have an attorney get in touch with him, and set up an interview with an attorney present, thereby protecting my constitutional rights.
Months later we met in a local attorney’s office. Me, the attorney, her stenographer and recorder, Agent Patrick Armor and an Agent Oh (not a stage name; he was Korean, and Oh is a common Korean last name).
When Agent Patrick Armor asked me if I saw anything illegal or involving violence or destruction, I said “Yeah, I saw the police! I watched the police badly injure and beat the hell out of innocent peaceful protestors, with no cause!”
Agent Patrick Armor just waved that off. No no, not that stuff, the crowd, the protestors is who the FBI is interested in. Instead of asking for more about the illegal police brutality I was willing to testify about, Agent Patrick Armor began asking me about what I did on January 6th.
“You know exactly what I did on January 6th better than I can recall now almost two years later” I responded. I reminded him and Agent Oh that their cell phone tracking ability could pin point every step I took on January 6th, from the bus ride starting in PA to the walk to the US Capitol to the location out in front of the US Capitol, and everything afterwards.
“If you already know where I was and what I did, then what is your purpose here of asking me to remember fine details of a chaotic day almost two years ago, if not to entrap me and accuse me of lying,” I said.
Agent Patrick Armor smiled cruelly at that response, and then began asking me about everything I did, everything everything everything about my experience that day, and what groups and organizations I belong to (he seemed genuinely alarmed about the old guy sportsmen’s clubs we have here in Pennsylvania, asked pointedly if I belonged to Proud Boys, Three Percenters, Oath Keepers or other similar organizations, and did not ask me about my friends who had been with me on J6); he even critiqued my blog essay about my J6 experience, pointing out that the Capitol Rotunda is actually inside the building, and not outside, as I had mistakenly written.
Note to freedom-loving Americans: When you have a federal agent criticizing your blog to your face, you have a justice system that is going off the rails and falling into the deep river canyon below. It is lawlessness in a free society that honors free speech.
After what felt like hours and hours, I had had enough, and said “I am done talking about something I can barely remember so long after the fact.”
My attorney assured me that I had not incriminated myself, nor lied, nor done or said anything that could be used against me by these federal agents. Little did she know then just how evil the Biden FBI was then becoming in these same circumstances, throwing law and constitution out the window in its pursuit of perfectly innocent people, like myself.
And so, that fake and unnecessary intimidation FBI interview hung over my head until President Trump won re-election for a third time in November 2024. All of my friends wondered aloud if some Biden Gestapo squad would come busting into my home at 4AM with fake charges from that interview. I concurred, but could think most about that three grand spent on the lawyer, instead of on the new roof our home needs.
So yeah, I intend to file a claim with the J6 weaponization fund people, and see if I cannot get my three grand back. I did nothing wrong, nothing that warranted two FBI agents grilling me. It would mean a lot to me, symbolically and financially, to get my money back.
Part 2: Here is Roger Stone on this subject, and he speaks for me if my words above are insufficient for you:
“…
The Republic in Chains
Empires rarely collapse all at once; they decay incrementally like an ancient cathedral left exposed to centuries of salt air and corrosion.
|
Empires rarely collapse all at once; they decay incrementally like an ancient cathedral left exposed to centuries of salt air and corrosion. The marble still glistens from a distance. The banners still wave. The ceremonies continue with rehearsed grandeur. Yet beneath the surface, the foundation begins to rot. Institutions once built to safeguard liberty metastasize into instruments of coercion. Bureaucracies swell into ravenous organisms consuming the very constitutional restraints that gave them life. The citizen gradually transforms from sovereign to subject while the state cloaks its appetite for power in the sanctimonious language of “security,” “justice,” and “democracy.” America now stands perilously close to that precipice.
This week the United States Department of Justice quietly acknowledged what millions of Americans have understood for years. On May 18, 2026 the Department of Justice announced the creation of what it calls the “Anti Weaponization Fund” a staggering $1.776 billion mechanism established through settlement agreements tied to the lawsuit Trump v. Internal Revenue Service. The suit stemmed from the unlawful leak of President Donald Trump’s tax returns and those of his family and business entities. Rather than monetary damages flowing directly to President Trump and the plaintiffs, the settlement instead creates a process whereby victims of government weaponization and political lawfare may seek apologies and financial redress from the federal government itself.
Pause for a moment and consider the sheer historical gravity of this announcement. The federal government is now formally establishing a taxpayer funded compensation structure for Americans harmed by politically motivated abuses carried out by government institutions. That alone is an indictment more damning than any speech ever delivered from the Senate floor. The very existence of this fund is an admission that the cancer of weaponized governance metastasized so profoundly throughout federal agencies that it now requires an official remediation process.
The Anti Weaponization Fund draws its money from the Treasury Department’s permanent Judgment Fund, the same perpetual appropriation mechanism historically used for government settlements and legal liabilities. Approximately $1.776 billion will transfer into the fund over the coming weeks. The structure itself is extraordinary. A five member commission appointed by the Attorney General will oversee claims, including one member selected in consultation with congressional leadership. The President retains removal authority over commissioners, and the panel will continue hearing claims until no later than December 1, 2028. Quarterly reports will be submitted to the Attorney General. Audits and anti fraud mechanisms are supposedly built into the process, while any remaining money at the end of the program returns to the federal government rather than activist organizations or politically connected nongovernmental entities.
The commission will reportedly evaluate claims according to the “totality of the circumstances,” including legal costs, imprisonment, financial losses, reputational destruction, and other demonstrable harms tied to politically motivated investigations or prosecutions. No partisan requirement officially exists. In theory any American who believes he or she was targeted by government power for ideological, political, or personal reasons may apply for compensation or formal acknowledgment.
That detail alone distinguishes this fund from earlier government settlement structures such as the Obama era Keepseagle settlement involving discrimination claims against the Department of Agriculture. Critics on the left have already erupted in apoplexy, hysterically describing the fund as a “slush fund” for Trump supporters and January 6 defendants. Yet the irony is staggering. These are the same political factions that spent years applauding taxpayer funded legal crusades, multimillion dollar special counsel investigations, coordinated intelligence leaks, censorship campaigns, and prosecutorial fishing expeditions aimed almost exclusively at conservatives, populists, Trump allies, and dissidents.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche declared that “the machinery of government should never be weaponized against any American.” Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter condemned the use of federal authority for “improper and unlawful political, personal, or ideological reasons.” Those are remarkable words because they constitute an extraordinary institutional confession. The Justice Department is effectively admitting that the federal apparatus became infected with partisan venom.
The term “lawfare” itself has become one of the defining terms of modern American politics. It is derived from combining the words “law” and “warfare,” a concept popularized by Air Force Colonel Charles Dunlap in 2001. At its core, lawfare means using legal systems as weapons rather than instruments of justice. Courts become battlefields. Prosecutors become political assassins wearing tailored suits instead of military uniforms. Investigations are strategically timed to destroy reputations, bankrupt adversaries, silence dissent, and manipulate public perception. The process itself becomes the punishment. Endless subpoenas, coordinated leaks, selective prosecutions, confiscatory legal bills, ruined careers, frozen bank accounts, and public humiliation become tools of attrition.
The Left perfected this strategy with almost medieval precision. The American legal system was transformed into a labyrinthine torture chamber designed to exhaust political enemies financially, emotionally, physically, and psychologically. They understood that even if convictions never materialized the spectacle itself could still inflict irreparable damage. The goal was never merely prosecution. The goal was obliteration.
Closely intertwined with lawfare is the broader phenomenon known as the weaponization of government. This phrase refers to the abuse of state power against citizens for political or ideological purposes. Agencies originally created to defend the nation instead become praetorian guards for entrenched bureaucracies and political factions. Intelligence agencies surveil political opponents. Federal law enforcement stages theatrical raids. Regulatory bodies harass disfavored industries and organizations. Social media companies receive pressure from government officials to censor lawful speech. Bureaucrats become unelected sovereigns operating behind layers of institutional opacity.
The Founding Fathers would have viewed such conduct as the behavior of tyrants. Thomas Jefferson warned repeatedly about the consolidation of executive power. James Madison feared factions manipulating institutions for partisan domination. George Washington cautioned against corrosive political tribalism consuming the republic from within. Benjamin Franklin famously warned Americans that they had been given “a republic, if you can keep it.” One suspects these men must now be rolling over in their graves as modern Americans witness armed federal agents behaving like a domestic occupying force.
I know this reality personally. I was besieged in my own home despite never committing a crime involving violence, espionage, or insurrection. Before dawn, 29 heavily armed FBI agents descended upon my residence in what can only be described as an outrageous pageant of intimidation orchestrated for maximum political theater. They arrived like a militarized phalanx storming a terrorist compound in Tikrit rather than serving a process crime indictment against a 66 year old political consultant. CNN had been conveniently tipped off in advance and positioned outside my home before the raid even began. That fact alone remains one of the most brazen and scandalous indications of collusion between federal law enforcement and corporate media in modern American history.
The entire spectacle was designed not for justice but for humiliation. It was political pornography masquerading as law enforcement. Federal agents armed with automatic firearms and other weapons arrived in tactical gear and stormed into my home before sunrise while cameras rolled outside to ensure maximum public degradation. Such conduct belongs in banana republics and collapsing authoritarian states, not in the constitutional republic established by George Washington and defended by generations of American patriots. They sent more people to arrest me than they did to neutralize Usama Bin Laden.
What happened to me was not isolated. President Donald Trump endured years of coordinated investigations, leaks, fabricated narratives, selective prosecutions, and unprecedented legal assaults. The Russia collusion hoax poisoned the nation for years despite collapsing under scrutiny. The Mar a Lago raid shattered all historical norms surrounding former presidents. Confidential tax records were leaked with virtual impunity. Intelligence officials manipulated media narratives while prosecutors and bureaucrats operated with astonishing asymmetry.
General Michael Flynn was financially annihilated through prosecutorial misconduct. Internal government communications later revealed discussions about whether the goal was to “get him to lie” or “get him fired.” A decorated military officer who served his country for decades was destroyed because he represented a threat to the permanent bureaucracy.
Rudy Giuliani, once celebrated as America’s Mayor for leading New York through the ashes and smoke of September 11, was transformed by the establishment media into a caricature to justify the destruction of his finances and reputation. His law licenses were attacked. His bank accounts were strained. His name continued to be dragged endlessly through the mud because he dared to challenge the ruling class and stand beside President Trump. The same media institutions that once canonized Giuliani suddenly treated him like a public enemy because political obedience matters more to the establishment than truth or loyalty.
Michael Caputo and his family also became casualties of this malignant culture of lawfare. Caputo has now filed one of the first claims seeking restitution through the Anti Weaponization Fund after years of investigations, smears, financial devastation, and personal suffering tied to the Russia investigation era. The implications are enormous because his claim may become the first domino in a tidal wave of similar filings by Americans who believe they were politically targeted.
The Michael McMahon case has now become one of the clearest modern examples of why Americans have lost faith in the integrity of the justice system itself. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the entire case against Michael McMahon in New York, a stunning development made even more extraordinary by the fact that the decision was ultimately unopposed by the prosecution. That detail speaks volumes. Cases with genuine evidentiary strength are defended aggressively on appeal. Here the government effectively stood aside while the conviction collapsed. Yet despite the implosion of the case, Michael McMahon had already endured imprisonment, financial devastation, reputational destruction, and years of emotional torment inflicted upon both him and his wife Martha along with their three children. The cost was not merely personal. Tens of millions of taxpayer dollars were incinerated pursuing a prosecution against an innocent man that many Americans now view as fundamentally meritless from the beginning. Careers were destroyed first while questions came later.
Similarly countless January 6 cases have begun unraveling under deeper legal scrutiny. Charges once wielded like political bludgeons were later narrowed, reconsidered, vacated, or criticized after defendants had already lost homes, careers, businesses, and years of their lives. The damage had already been done. Men and women were transformed into political hostages while cable news networks converted prosecutions into prime time entertainment. The process itself became the punishment.
John Eastman likewise became one of the most visible casualties of modern lawfare. Eastman, a constitutional attorney and former law professor, advised President Trump regarding legal theories surrounding the disputed 2020 election. For that alone he became the target of disbarment proceedings, criminal investigations, financial ruin, public vilification, and relentless professional destruction. Regardless of whether one agrees with his legal theories, the broader danger is unmistakable. Lawyers cannot provide candid constitutional advice to presidents or political clients if every unpopular legal argument risks professional annihilation years later. Once legal advocacy itself becomes criminalized, constitutional government begins suffocating beneath the weight of political vengeance.
Jeff Clark represents another central figure in this expanding landscape of lawfare victims. Clark served as a senior Department of Justice official during the final year of the Trump Administration, including as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division and previously as head of the Environment and Natural Resources Division. A highly credentialed attorney educated at Harvard and Georgetown, Clark became a target because he questioned aspects of the 2020 election process and discussed potential investigative avenues within the Department of Justice. For those actions he became the subject of coordinated political attacks, congressional targeting, bar disciplinary proceedings, raids, investigations, crushing legal expenses, and attempts to destroy his professional livelihood.
Supporters argue that Clark is being punished not for criminal conduct but for offering legal advice and participating in internal executive branch deliberations that political opponents later found objectionable. The implications are chilling. If government lawyers can be professionally destroyed for providing controversial advice to elected officials, then future administrations will govern beneath a permanent cloud of fear, intimidation, and ideological enforcement. That is not constitutional governance. That is bureaucratic terror masquerading as ethics enforcement.
Then there are the January 6 defendants. Nearly 1,600 Americans were charged in connection with January 6. Many lost careers, homes, businesses, pensions, reputations, marriages, and years of their lives. One only needs to glance at social media to see and read all their stories which are, admittedly, too voluminous to fully comprehend all at once. Some J6er’s were held in prolonged pretrial detention under conditions critics described as punitive and politically motivated. Images of nonviolent defendants being marched in shackles, isolated, denied opportunities, and publicly vilified became symbols of what many Americans viewed as selective justice and ideological vengeance.
President Trump repeatedly described many January 6 defendants as “horribly treated” and victims of weaponized government. He issued pardons and commutations for many involved. Lawyers representing January 6 defendants are already signaling their intention to pursue restitution claims through the Anti Weaponization Fund for legal expenses, imprisonment, lost livelihoods, reputational destruction, and emotional suffering.
Predictably establishment figures erupted in outrage. Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges have already moved to challenge the legality of the fund in court, arguing that taxpayer money should not compensate January 6 participants. Yet even Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche declined to categorically exclude such claimants, emphasizing instead that cases will be evaluated individually according to the totality of circumstances.
That phrase is critical because it suggests the commission may examine prosecutorial conduct, sentencing disparities, pretrial detention practices, financial ruin, selective charging decisions, and broader patterns of government behavior rather than merely accepting official narratives at face value.
Meanwhile politically connected figures on the left routinely escaped accountability for conduct that would have destroyed any conservative public figure. The violent Black Live Matter domestic terror attacks during 2020 caused billions of dollars in damage, destroyed neighborhoods, injured police officers, and terrorized cities across the nation, yet media organizations often described the chaos as “mostly peaceful.” Prosecutors dropped charges. Politicians raised bail money. Celebrities endorsed the unrest. Americans watched a bifurcated justice system emerge before their eyes. One standard existed for regime loyalists and another for dissidents. This asymmetry shattered public trust.
The Department of Justice announcement therefore represents something far larger than a settlement agreement. It is a tacit acknowledgment that confidence in federal institutions has catastrophically eroded. Once citizens begin viewing law enforcement and intelligence agencies as partisan actors rather than neutral guardians of justice, the moral legitimacy of the republic itself begins to fracture. Civilization depends upon confidence in impartial justice. Without it nations descend into tribalism, cynicism, instability, and eventually societal disintegration.
The Anti Weaponization Fund does not erase the damage already inflicted. It does not restore ruined reputations, recover lost years, or repair shattered families. It does not undo unconstitutional surveillance, improperly motivated political prosecutions, media coordinated character assassinations, destroyed careers, or psychological trauma. But it does represent something profoundly important. It is the first formal recognition by the federal government that the machinery of the state was corrupted and turned inward against the American people themselves.
For years millions of Americans were told these concerns were paranoid fantasies. They were mocked, censored, ridiculed, and dismissed. Anyone questioning federal agencies was branded dangerous, extremist, conspiratorial, or unhinged. Yet now the Department of Justice itself has effectively admitted the disease existed all along. The Goliath finally confessed what I and so many other Americans already knew. It had become sinister. It had become monstrous. And now after years of humiliation, intimidation, prosecutions, raids, censorship, surveillance, bankruptcies, and public destruction, the American people are finally demanding restitution from the very monster that turned against them.”
******
Two great shows coming up soon!
Two great shows are coming up soon. If you live in central Pennsylvania, then fortunate you. If you live farther out or even far away, even out of state, both are worth traveling to, even from far, far away.
The first show starts this Friday, the 18th Century Artisan’s Faire, now (as of last year) held in Carlisle, PA, at the Carlisle Expo Center at 100 K Street. It used to be called the Lewisburg Show, because for decades it was held in Lewisburg, PA, along Route 15. The Carlisle Expo Center is SO MUCH BETTER than the prior hotel venue. I went to this show last year and could have easily spent both days there. Better lay-out, better room, more room, higher ceilings and far better lighting.
If you are afflicted with history-itis, with a passion for hand-made tools and utensils of all sorts, including eating utensils like forks and knives and plates, with blacksmithing and historic reenacting, with hand-carved curly maple furniture and gunstocks, leatherworking, with anything black powder or flintlock or percussion, with 17th and 18th century clothing, then this show is for you. I have been attending for I don’t know how many years, a long time, and every time I go it’s worth it. The nationwide talent that is assembled at this show is amazing to experience.
The second show starts this Saturday, the Great American Outdoor Show. It is held for the whole week in Harrisburg at the Farm Show Complex on Cameron Street. This is the “new” show built on the ashes of the old one, which I helped end by starting a boycott.
The prior show was run by a British promoter, and they had no feel for America, Americans, guns, gun rights etc. In the immediate political backwash of another Democrat-run mass school shooting, that British promoter tried to prohibit exhibitors from having AR-15 platform rifles. That set off a slight negative reaction among the paid participants, advertisers, and attendees that culminated in the boycott, which ended the show that year. And it ended that tone deaf promoter’s role in the show ever-after.
In the press interviews I did about shutting down that show, my favorite quote was “The British did not understand Americans in 1776, and they still don’t understand us in 2012.”
To which I think we can easily now add the entire Democrat Party, because it is openly and officially the political party of big government, of citizen disarmament and gun confiscation, of digital currency and your money control, of high taxes, of speech control, of thought control, of censorship, of car control, of health care control, of Covid lockdowns and private citizen movement control, but not USA border control.
Nope, under the Democrat Party the American border is wide freakin’ open to tens of millions of anyone and everyone from around the world.
So, go to these two shows. Both are very family friendly, regardless of what your family members each like. You will be really happy you did go. Enjoy America and freedom while you still can.
On Friday and Saturday you can rub elbows with gunpowder horn makers, flint knappers, flintlock and percussion rifle makers, black powder bag makers, historic dress and bonnet makers, tri-corner hat makers, and blacksmiths.
On Sunday you can go to the Farm Show Complex and see the whole world of tactical socks and vests, endless semiauto blast-em rifles as well as very cool historic lever action rifles and Wild West revolvers, bushcraft duck calls, high fence deer hunting legends and other TV created one-dimensional personalities, useful ATVs, fabulous boats, and cool end-of-the-world survival RVs, high tech synthetic and high tech wool outdoor boots and clothing, hunting guides from all around the world, and all kinds of fishing stuff. The Great American Outdoor Show really is an amazing experience. I highly recommend it.
I myself will be both a visitor and a volunteer at the GAOS. After many years of volunteering at the show and its predecessor, I took 2021-2023 off. This year I will be volunteering one or two days with the Pennsylvania Trappers Association, a wonderful conservation group of which I am a Life Member. Come on by the PTA booth and chat with us!
U.S. Sportsmen must vote gun rights next week
[A version of this essay was published by the American Thinker at https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/american_sportsmen_must_vote_gun_rights_next_week.html ]
It is not news to anyone who cares about American liberty that guns of every sort, caliber, style, color, and design have been in the crosshairs of anti-gun activists for decades. It is no stretch to describe these anti-gun activists as totalitarians-in-waiting, because their ultimate goal is complete civilian disarmament, which results in only one thing: Tyranny. Yes, even black powder muzzleloading rifles are targeted by gun grabbers, even though the last time an American was hurt by one was when someone took one off the mantel and dropped it on their toe.
Anti-gun activists are especially seeking “universal background checks,” because that process would allow them to build up the kind of individual firearm owner database they need now to do the door-to-door gun confiscation they dream of later on. But on this subject they keep running up against a political and legal buzz saw from the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, Firearms Owners Against Crime, and various state rifle and pistol associations. And so now gun grabbers are going after the one chink in the gun owners’ armor, what they see as the weakest link in the gun owners chain, and that is America’s sportsmen.
Sportsmen are an unusual demographic group of mostly political moderates, super-voters who cherish clean waterways, support land trusts and coastal conservation organizations, and who also cling strongly to their often basic hunting guns. Sportsmen are mostly not the AR15 “black rifle” tactical crowd, and that has made them especially interesting to the gun grabbers.
And so an effort is afoot to convince American hunters, trappers, and recreational fishermen that the most important issues they must vote for and about next week are the environment and public lands. And we all know how that mantra goes: Republicans are bad, and Democrats are good, which translates into Trump Bad, Biden Good. Never mind that most environmental groups are partisan Democrat Party activism centers who use the environment as their excuse to make war, now there are fake sportsmen’s groups and fake gun owner’s groups.
When you dig just a bit under the thin veneer of these groups’ “we are wholesome sportsmen and gun owners just like you” message, what you find is no surprise. They are each just yet one more phony, politically partisan, anti-gun concoction that camouflages itself as something else. Several anti-gun groups in particular are targeting sportsmen with deceptive behavior. The Union Sportsmen’s Alliance and Gun Owners for Safety are chock full of people professing to be ardent gun owners, but who nonetheless inevitably cite the same garbage anti-gun “studies” and who inevitably promote draconian anti-gun policies as “fair,” and “common sense” etc. These fake groups are as easy to spot as phonies as is a pheasant breaking thirty yards out against a clear blue Fall sky.
But a third group that is really gaining traction among sportsmen is Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, and they much more carefully, perhaps artfully, straddle the natural mix of environmental quality and gun ownership interests that sportsmen have. And BHA is strident this year about voting on environmental issues alone, to the exclusion of gun rights. Its president, a guy actually named Land Tawney, has a long association with Barack Obama and Democrat Party activism. BHA is partnering with Patagonia clothing company, which has underwritten and promoted a movie called Public Trust: The Fight for America’s Public Lands. This movie is the centerpiece of BHA’s get-out-the-vote efforts this year.
Public Trust is done in a documentary style, narrated by Hal Herring, a long-time writer for Field & Stream magazine. The movie is masterful and has great cinematography. But it is not always accurate, especially in claims about so-called climate change and hanging every environmental problem and cause around the neck of – you guessed it – Republicans and the Donald Trump Administration. Public Trust also plays the usual environmentalist game of presenting false choices. For example, water quality concerns about the proposed Twin Metals copper mine in Minnesota could be addressed through posting a sufficient cleanup bond, but that would negate all the opportunities for political drama that liberals want.
If President Trump’s political opponents forget to mention that he signed the Great American Outdoors Act just a few months ago, allow me to remind them. The GAOA funded the Land and Water Conservation Fund for the first time since human-caused “climate change” was just a twinkle in Al Gore’s eye. GAOA funded national and local parks and forests operations and maintenance backlogs, infrastructure needs, and a host of other conservation and public lands needs from sea to shining sea. Trump is not an evil anti-environment boogey man, but Joe Biden certainly is an ardent gun-grabber, and his inner circle is a constellation of anti-trapping and anti-hunting groups.
Next week, American sportsmen cannot afford the luxury of voting for anything but Second Amendment rights. Without our guns, there is no sporting tradition, period, so vote for President Donald J. Trump. See you in the field afterwards!

Patagonia clothing company has this confusing message posted on its website. See, to me, a “climate denier” is a “science believer” and a human-caused climate change proponent is at best a gullible fool hyped up on a political cause that has no science in it, behind it, around it.

Who knows where Patagonia got this smokestack city photo, but if it is in America, the white emissions are probably steam. Which is water. Which is not a pollutant. To try to sell this as a picture of commonplace industrial pollution, Patagonia and BHA want viewers to believe we are really living in 1968.

A greedy white man in a suit, carving up parts of America for dinner with his cruel, bloody chef knife. A part of my experience tells me there is a grain of truth to this propaganda, because it is true that America’s natural resources have been utilized for three hundred years. Including now by the Crow Indian tribe on tribal lands, thanks to President Donald Trump.
The word “tactical” – overused, kind of
By Josh First
Have you seen the word “tactical” used lately?
The word appears everywhere, and is growing in prominence across the retail world.
Although “tactical” is a word that denotes, or really connotes military tactics, and was once reserved to the sole use of the United States Military combat units or the dangerously armed forces they faced, this word now imputes some special meaning, martial ability, and toughness to anything that wears it on the label.
There are tactical knives, vests, rifles, pistols, and the many accoutrements that go with these items. There seem to be tactical diapers, tactical coffee mugs, and tactical pens. OK, there are to my knowledge no tactical diapers or coffee mugs, but it is true that someone will or already is onto these items. Actually, there are tactical pens meant for self defense, but whether or not they have actual value for military tactics is a questionable claim.
For another true example of the oddly named, there are tactical shirts. No lie, there are “tactical shirts” dedicated to more easily accessing one’s concealed pistol.
Is it really so difficult to just wear a regular old LL Bean button down short sleeve Pima cotton Oxford? Is a shirt with confusing numbers of magnum zipper pulls in sensitive places really, truly a better shirt than the LL Bean? Does it really make you a tougher guy or gal? Do our combat forces wear these shirts? No?
As if it isn’t odd enough to call a shirt or a vest “tactical,” we now have tactical airguns, I kid you not. The Crosman TR77 looks like a Star Trek photon shooter that makes bad guys vaporize painlessly, but it is claimed by its maker to have some sort of tactical application.
As if!
Air guns pack all the wallop of a good slap to the head, albeit with more concentrated force. Certainly some shoot pellets that can penetrate your flesh, and perhaps even your temple. But if I were a law enforcement officer engaged in a really deadly standoff with a violent, dangerous bad guy, a freakin airgun is the last thing I’d want in my hands. My tactic in that situation would be to run away, fast.
So obviously the word “tactical” is being, ummm, stretched in meaning a bit these days.
But for whatever reason, this word increasingly resonates with the American public, and it may be a result of the hyper-militarization of our local police forces. Plenty has been written in recent months about how the legendary bumbling Officer Barney Fife became the sinister looking, crewcut-and-armor-wearing badass kicking down grandma’s door in East Succotash, America. SWAT teams in East Succotash, America, are not necessary, and it is a serious issue, because Americans have a natural aversion to government force applied to them.
No doubt about it, America’s local police are in an arms race with…hmmmm… either themselves, far-off international military forces, or possibly, probably, you.
That’s right, there is plenty of evidence indicating that the massive investment in military grade hardware and hard attitude at the local police level is translating into a natural citizen reaction, apparently in preparation for inevitable urban combat with the very people once sworn to protect us. And so we have an increasing “if-they-have-it, we-need-it, too,” civilian reach for all things tactical. Tactical now seems to mean “I am ready for combat,” an American attitude that is both refreshing and alarming.
Alarming indeed. Why are we afraid of our own local police forces? When did that happen? And, come to think of it, why did the local Harrisburg cop try to stare me down last year, on my own street, when I cheerfully said hello to him while walking on our sidewalk with my small son in hand? Was he employing some anti-citizen ‘tactic’? Sure felt that way to me, the law-abiding taxpayer underwriting that guy’s paycheck and tough guy attitude.
However, instead of meeting fire with fire, and buying a black bulletproof vest with webbing and the ubiquitous variation of a skull-and-crossbones trademark label, I think I will for now reach for my ‘tactical pen’ and write about my uncomfortable encounter, thereby defeating that officer’s ungainly attempt to bring implied force into what should have been a friendly exchange between equals.
Josh’s Comments to Eastern Sports & Outdoor Show Promoter
Over the past ten days a brouhaha in the most unlikely place has been gathering force.
Ten days ago, Reed Expos, the promoter of the Eastern Sports & Outdoor Show, abruptly announced that “tactical firearms” would not be permitted at the 2013 ESOS.
The ESOS is held annually at the Pennsylvania Farm Show. It is the largest outdoor show in the country, and draws a million participants from around the nation. Hunting and fishing guides, ATV – trailer – and firearms manufacturers, clothing dealers, ammunition experts, trappers, land conservationists all gather for a week to promote, sell, entertain, teach, and transact on every aspect of the outdoors. If you hunt, fish or enjoy the outdoors, this is your show.
Reed Expos is reportedly not the easiest company to deal with in the best of times. “A one-way street” is how several vendors described them to me, emphasizing that the promoter’s short-term profits seem to trump all other considerations year after year.
When Reed Expos suddenly announced that AR-15s and similar firearms could not be displayed, most vendors felt not only betrayed in a time of political weakness, but that their own vendor contract had been unilaterally breached. When one of the bigger vendors approached me for help getting through to Reed Expos and trying to get them to change their new policy, I in turn reached out to Pennsylvania’s sporting leadership (below are the comments I sent to Reed Expo, eight days ago). The Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, WIld Turkey Federation, Hunters for Sunday Hunting, and the Wildlife for Everyone Foundation all leapt into action. For those political watchers wondering if the hunting community still has clout, feast your eyes on this: In just eight days, over 80 vendors have pulled out of the ESOS, including powerhouse Cabela’s.
Not many visitors are going to hand over ten dollars for entrance to a hall that is largely empty. The whole ESOS is now looking like a bust, sad to say. Every year my kids come with me to shop, talk, and talk shop with many vendors who have become personal friends. For example, John R. Johnson of Perry County is my custom knife maker, and every year I go to see him and his lovely wife, and pick up a beautiful, rugged new knife. One hall over is Cody Calls, makers of state-of-the-art turkey calls, a family-owned business. I get to talk with the Cody founders and the next generation, listening to their take on the changing world of outdoor sports. Cody Calls has given me expensive calls to give to new turkey hunters, who in turn take them home and become consummate woodsmen. These are all good, good people. The thought of missing all of them this year feels like losing an aunt or uncle; it’s just a little painful.
But boycotting the ESOS is the right thing to do. Reed Expos, if you won’t stand with us, then why should we stand with you?
January 13, 2013
Mr. Chris O’Hara, Public Outreach Coordinator
Reed Expos
Dear Mr. O’Hara,
Thank you for your time on the phone today. I am opposed to Reed Expo’s new policy of excluding semiautomatic rifles from the 2013 Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show here in Harrisburg, PA, scheduled for next month. As you requested, here is a recapitulation of our conversation:
1) Semi-automatic rifles are sporting arms by any standard or definition. AR-15s dominate the organized high-power target competitions across the nation. In many states AR-style rifles are legal for hunting small and large game. The same goes for other semi-automatic long arms and in some cases, semi-automatic pistols, like the .50 Caliber Desert Eagle. Semi-automatic shotguns are legal in all states for waterfowl. Gun prohibitionists make no distinction between semi-automatic rifles and semi-automatic shotguns; today they are trying to eliminate the rifles. If they are successful with those, they will next go for the shotguns. Reed Expos is buying into a false definition.
2) The Second Amendment to the Constitution has zero to do with hunting or target arms. Like all of the other rights in the Bill of Rights, it confers an individual right. Its intention in 1787 was, and remains today, to guarantee that citizens can belong to state-based militias to off-set the military power of the Federal government and that they can personally own the military-grade firearms necessary to make those militias effective. Today’s AR-15 and other similar semi-automatic rifles are basically the civilian version of the full automatic arms used by the military. Hunting and target shooting arms are naturally included in the Second Amendment, but they are not at its core, or its purpose. Civilians have owned military grade long arms and pistols since the beginning of our nation. We will continue to do so.
3) The Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show is and has been all about outdoor sports, including hunting and shooting. Your audience does not make the artificial distinction that you are making between one long arm and another long arm.
4) By excluding semi-automatic long arms at this desperate hour, when the enemies of liberty are doing everything possible to eradicate the Second Amendment, Reed Expos is abandoning its core consumers. Reed Expos is caving in on a symbolically powerful issue. Let me ask you: Who pays to enter the ESOS? Gun prohibitionists, or gun rights enthusiasts? Reed Expos is shooting itself in the foot, and damaging its relationship with its audience (not to mention the SHOT Show). If you do not stand with us, then why should we stand with you?
5) Every year our family goes to the ESOS. Living in Harrisburg makes it easy for us, and we also volunteer for some of the non-profit groups who have booths there. My three children have grown up with the ESOS. It is a big part of their year, marking the end of most hunting seasons and the beginning of fishing season. They buy new clothes and hats, see old friends, view equipment, etc. So, it is both upsetting and kind of edifying to hear that vendors are now discussing a boycott of the event, in order to communicate their displeasure with Reed Expos. To miss the ESOS would be my family’s personal loss; but to see your poor decision rewarded with the justified financial punishment of a boycott would be mighty rewarding.
Thank you for considering my comments,
Josh First
Harrisburg, PA





