Secret Video Shows ’Crooked’ Hillary Delegate Explaining Democrat Approach to Banning Guns

Send to Kindle

The good old bait and switch tactic. Sell people on one idea and then once they’re hooked, redirect them into supporting another, more extreme idea.

It shouldn’t be a surprise to any of us, but that’s exactly what many Democrats do with respect to gun control. They sell American voters on “common sense” safety measures that “respect the Second Amendment” during election season, but once they’re in power they change their tune and do everything they can to gut one’s Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Proof of this approach is not hard to find. Back when he was campaigning for president, Barack Obama did exactly that.

“When you all go home and you’re talking to your buddies and you say, ah ‘He wants to take my gun away.’ You’ve heard it here, I’m on television so everybody knows it. I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people’s lawful right to bear arms. I will not take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won’t take your handgun away,” said Obama, during a campaign stop in a Lebanon, Virginia in 2008.

Fast forward to February 2013, the first year of his second term in office, and Obama sounds a bit different on the issue.

“We should restore the ban on military-style assault weapons and a 10-round limit for magazines. And that deserves a vote in Congress — because weapons of war have no place on our streets, or in our schools, or threatening our law enforcement officers,” said Obama while visiting the Minneapolis Police Department Special Operations Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

And yet again, we have more proof. The undercover video above, taken by Project Veritas Action, shows a Hillary Clinton Alternate Delegate discussing how the party softens its rhetoric to hide its true gun-banning agenda.

The PVA journalist asks the woman about whether Hillary supports banning all guns, to which she replies, “for sure… You have to take that sort of moderate ‘We just wanna have common sense legislation so our children are safe!’ You say shit like that, and then people will buy into it.”

Right, sell voters the guff about “reasonable” and “common sense” and “keeping children safe” so they vote Hillary, only so that Hillary can turn around and do her darnedest to push for legislation that would ban many commonly owned and widely popular firearms.

As the woman goes on to say, “I’m totally against them [firearms]. And my husband is against guns. My husband is now a registered democrat.”

Again, this game of bait and switch shouldn’t come as a surprise to any of you. But then again you’re not the target. The low information voter is the target. So, the onus is on us to educate those voters, to fight back against Hillary’s lies, to point out that when a Democrat says “common sense” and “reasonable” restrictions, what they really mean is “a ban on firearms.”

{ 24 comments… add one }
  • BRUCE P. MARSTON October 23, 2016, 9:44 am

    Just watched your democrat anti gun video. I’m sick just thinking about what will happen to America if that low-life scumbag gets elected! America will be finished and our children will have a very bleak future!

  • L. Shamus McQuade July 31, 2016, 11:25 am

    Like what does a Clinton Delegate have the franchise on what Hillary will do, is thinking, etc…….This woman is another pawn in the big scheme. Once she serves her purpose or does not provide any use she will be discarded like a dixie cup….Yet these people walk around so self rightous armed with all the answers ( according to them) drunk on drinking their own bathwater…….All you have to know is Clinton is a marxist and the constitution runs counter to her principles and doctrines she has as a marxist, guns, speech, religion will all be regulated and laws re-written to water down the constitution where it will be only a relic in Wash DC

  • timothyf7 July 29, 2016, 9:03 pm

    What I see is a person that just wants to be more important than she really is. Talking about things that she is way out of her league to be discussing. She hints at her previous failures in politics and wants to seem very informed; while in all reality, she is less important at the convention than the janitors cleaning up afterwards. She is pitiful but not news worthy.

  • David July 29, 2016, 4:17 pm

    We should all read the series by A. American. Great series of books based on the government when they over step.

  • Ron July 29, 2016, 2:50 pm

    Does this so-call “delegate” have an inside scoop on the Democrat gun control agenda, or is she just blathering her own personal wishes to an interviewer who probably falsified his identity in order to get his inside scoop? In the giant crowds at these conventions you will undoubtedly find people with every imaginable belief. No Democrat connected with the Obama administration or the future Clinton administration has proposed “banning all guns,” that is just silly paranoia. Clinton in her acceptance speech clearly said she has no intention to abolish the 2nd Amendment, she will likely push for “no fly, no buy” and probably for background checks at gun shows. These are a far cry from “banning all guns.” It’s important to avoid becoming a foot-soldier in Trump’s army of paranoid lunatics.

    • David July 29, 2016, 4:13 pm

      Just going to say that if a politician is talking to you they are lying to you. Not a voter for Trump, not a voter for Clinton. No politician should have there own agenda. Our country was not formed on the belief that the president dictates to the people. As Lincoln said “and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth”. So any candidate that stands up and says if elected I will blah blah blah. How about if I elect you, you do what we want not what lines your pocket. Not jumping on you Ron. Just going with your political statement. No Fly no buy is principle is a good idea except that the mechanism (the government) responsible for the no fly list is beyond terrible. Look how many kids get put on the list. How easy would it be for the government to make that list grow because you spoke out badly about the government. Yes I do not trust my government one bit. I do not think they have anyone’s best interest at heart other then there own. They all will say or do anything to get elected and then to get re-elected. Look at photos of sleeping congress and senators. If I fell asleep at my job I would be thrown out on my butt. Anyway some valid points of idiots spouting out what they think you want to hear. Gun shows is probably a good thing to have background checks. To easy for a felon to walk in and buy something. But I also think the seller’s need to be checked. Way to many sellers popping off shots. No such thing as an accidental discharge.

      • Bobby West July 29, 2016, 6:56 pm

        Ron/David.
        I think both of you are libtard activists. Every gun show has background checks when weapons are purchased. The dealers are all FFL holders and would be slammed by the ATF if they did not do the background checks. A felon cannot walk into a gun show and buy guns. That is also one of the laws which the current administration does not enforce anyway, as many felons have tried to buy guns and get rejected by the background check. At that point the police become involved because the felon has just committed a felony. The Obama Justice Dept. does not like to prosecute those cases because it would be the third strike for many.
        And do you really want to set up a “No fly, no buy”with no recourse for having your name put on the list. At this point any government official can put names on the no fly list. There is no way to get it removed, redacted or corrected because it is arbitrary. The person putting your name on the list does not have to reveal their identity. Really? You really want secret government programs like this?
        That is one of the main reasons for the 2nd amendment. To prevent our government from becoming tyrannical. The only “common sense” gun laws are laws that are on the books and rigerously enforced that put criminals away for a very long time if they use a gun in the commission of a crime. That is the only “common sense” approach to gun laws. Taking guns away from law abiding citizens is not the answer. Taking guns away from criminals is.

        • John Smith July 30, 2016, 12:41 pm

          Mr.West,
          You are wrong.All gun shows do not require their vendors to do background checks on buyers.If the seller is an individual selling his own guns,then he is not required to perform a background check.This is in Tennessee where I live,but I imagine that is the case in other ststes as well.I don’t think you need an FFL to sell guns at a gun show,but I may be wrong about that.

    • Steven July 29, 2016, 5:06 pm

      Spoken like a true liberal!

    • P cullens July 30, 2016, 12:30 pm

      I have seen and heard H Clinton state in an affirmative tone that we should consider taking the action taken by the UK and Australia. Both countries have taken actions to ban and confiscate firearms. Both countries bans were made possible by a gun registry.

      You may drink all the red kook-aide you want but the facts don’t change. HRC made a public statement that we should consider doing what UK and Australia did-ban guns!

      If you say “I believe in the 2nd Ammendment”, and you say”We should consider banning guns”, one of these statements is a LIE!

      “Shall not be infringed” is not ambiguous.

      Of course, HRC would never LIE.

  • AK July 29, 2016, 2:15 pm

    The time for talk is rapidly passing.

  • Leighton Cavendish July 29, 2016, 10:34 am

    Imagine if the same approach was used to ban/limit large houses…your pets…your vehicles…kids…whatever
    sounds a lot like what happened when Hitler…and others…came to power…

    • Somerset Frisby July 29, 2016, 3:59 pm

      That is true for any ranting, raving, self-aggrandizing politician such as Hillie. Now I know who she reminds me of – Adolf Hitler. She rants just like he did!

      • David July 29, 2016, 4:14 pm

        They all rant. If there lips are moving there lying.

  • Joe July 29, 2016, 5:09 am

    This has been common knowledge for years.
    This shit comes right out of Bloomberg’s book of gun grabbing, taken out of the operating procedures of Hitlers fascism manual for takeover and total control.
    I have been teaching my nephews and nieces about this shit coming their way for a decade or more.
    And if you aren’t preaching the real truth to your relatives just starting out on their own then you are part of the problem !!

  • SuperG July 27, 2016, 1:47 pm

    “Say shit like that and people will buy into it”. She’s right of course. Apparently the manipulation of the masses is justified if you want to crusade a cause, and use guile and deceit to attain it. Her approach can’t be novel from what has come out about the DNC “leadership”, so it must ubiquitous among them. But that downside is that when you such such tactics to win, and it comes out before you’ve actually one, it will usually backfire on you in a big way. I hope this video is spread far and wide. The American people need to know that they are being duped by dishonorable people who want to assassinate the Constitution.

  • Christian July 26, 2016, 4:03 pm

    Honestly guys, I am not surprised by what these “gun free” people ask for but at the same time they still want a gun for themselves because this is all that can save you if a maniac comes into your house. And these “democrats” are in fact lying dictators and I do believe that this video would be a great tool for you guys to inform the “low information voter”, as the text mentions it at the end. I do believe you better download the video via the help of a website that can download it, because I wouldn’t be surprised if Hillary would ask Youtube to block it (happened to at least one video at gunsamerica already due to “copyright issues” as they stated it) and then spread it to everyone you know.

    I do wonder why it is so hard to find politicians that stick to their words from the beginning to the very end. If I would be a politician, I would have a plan on what I want to do to change the country to be better and therefore I make some goals and I stick to them. I could not say, like Hillary, that I do believe that marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman and a few years later I support all this queer stuff. But this is just the opinion of some random guy who is not part of any party, so does my opinion really count, even if I would have the chance to say this to a politician directly? I guess not.

    By the way, I know that to be in a relationship with somebody acquires two people that are in fact kind of the same so that the relationship can work. Yet, this “husband” that woman has must be a real loser, if he is also against guns and now, just like she, a democrat just because of her. I am not the kind of person that wants to bring hell over people with words but I await the day these two will be assaulted in their home and none can save the other or she gets raped and he stands besides and can only watch and dial 911, as I suggest if she can turn him that easily to become a democrat then he cannot be the toughest guy either. They both are in fact prime examples of what devoted democrats are like and what they want to do. And I even go this far to say that all the people in the background that cheer for Hillary and waving American flags, wearing Hillary shirts etc. are in fact payed by the democrats to do so or just completely mentally disturbed.

    By the way, I hope you guys have a good watch over on the votes in November. I wouldn’t be surprised if the democrats try to… how could I say… erase or correct some of the ballot papers where the X has not been made at the “right place”, you know.

    But guys, maybe this will brighten you up a bit. Your politicians and activist groups are not the only ones that are such devoted liars. Here in Germany they are also like that. For example, they all shout for “Oh yeah, please please let billions of refugees in here and have our own people be raped and killed, oh yeah!” but as soon as you try to place some containers for those “refugees” (90% of them are not) close to the areas where these people, the ones that ask for more and more, live, well you cannot imagine how strictly these freaks are suddenly against these guys as soon as reality knocks at their doors as well.

    So can your activist groups or politicians change to the intelligent side? Some of them yes, as soon as some bad guy with a gun comes around and they have to face reality but beware, some of these politicians and activists won’t even change after having experienced such a situation themselves. Some people are just unchangeable and Hillary is for sure one of them.

    • AK July 26, 2016, 9:25 pm

      I think you’re wrong about that, I’m sure she’s safe because her “husband” is probably more of a woman than her and he’ll get most of the action while she watches, but she’ll be good with it as they support alternate lifestyles.

      • Christian July 27, 2016, 7:14 am

        Hehe, I guess you might be right in this case AK! 🙂 I have to remember to be careful these days. Just because a woman talks about “my husband” it might not be as I normally think!

  • Tom Horn July 26, 2016, 3:26 pm

    Liars and Hippocrates! While the Democrats are working hard to ban you (American civilian, citizen) from owning so-called, “military style assault weapons,” they have been militarizing civilian federal government agencies, for what purpose can only be speculated. Between 2006-2014, sixty-seven non-military federal agencies have spent $1.48 billion on guns, ammunition, and military equipment. Including, but not inclusive:
    $10.71 million for guns/ammo for the IRS (including, Glocks, S&W M&P 15’s, H&K 416’s,…)
    $3.1 million ” ” ” for the VA
    $4.77 million ” ” ” for the Animal and Plant Inspection Service
    $217.5 million for ammo alone, including 453 million hollow point rounds, for the DHS

    Who authorized these civilian agencies to militarize? It wasn’t, “We the People.” What are they preparing for, that they think Joe Civilian and his legal militias don’t need to prepare for? Is this militarization of civilian agencies even Constitutional? What was the purpose of that 2nd Amendment thing, again?

  • Al July 26, 2016, 3:18 pm

    I have a better idea: Let’s start with “Common Sense” immigration reform.

    • Allen Reel July 28, 2016, 6:38 am

      Yeah go ahead and change the subject . A better idea would be to address the issue at hand. . You must not care about gun rights of legal law abiding citizens . Take your ” common sense ” immigration reform ideas else where . You are either for the 2nd amendment or against it

      • Tom Horn July 28, 2016, 11:00 am

        Well…. there is this, from the Illinois State Rifle Associations, Executive Directors Message, 7/28/2016:

        “…We have been told that ISIS is on the run and that everything will be just fine if we Let Syrian refugees and other Islamic immigrants into the United States. No one is pointing out that in the last 10 days, Germany suffered four terrorist attacks and France just had an 85-year-old priest’s throat cut. Everything was perpetrated by Islamic immigrants or recent refugees. Worldwide, as of July 25, there have been 1003 terrorist attacks, killing in excess of 3000 people. I missed those figures on the nightly news. Did you see them?

        The European police departments are publicly admitting they are overwhelmed. The same thing is going to happen here if we let it. The situation is already bad and it will only get worse. I suggest that you prepare yourself with more training…”

        • Dan Erickson July 29, 2016, 1:25 pm

          They will just form a group called MLM and say they are being profiled by the cops in this country.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend