Categories
All About Guns Born again Cynic! California

Taxing Our Gun Rights-CA Gov Newsom Calls 10% tax a “Sin Tax” By Matthew Maruster

California is always at the forefront of the national conversation on gun control, and Governor Gavin Newsom is a prominent figure in pushing for strict regulations. California’s plasticized Governor signed Assembly Bill 28 which directly assaults law-abiding American citizens’ by adding a state tax to firearm or ammunition purchases.

California Assembly Bill 28—

The federal government already imposes a 10-12% tax on all firearm purchases. But the new California law is the first time where a state will impose another tax on any person who wants to purchase a firearm or ammunition.

The relevant part of the law does the following things:

  • -impose an excise tax in the amount of 11% of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of a firearm
  • -impose an excise tax in the amount of 11% of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of a firearm precursor part
  • -impose an excise tax in the amount of 11% of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of ammunition
  • -require that the revenues collected be deposited in the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Fund
  • -moneys received in the fund to be used to fund various gun violence prevention, education, research, response, and investigation programs
  • -require each licensed firearms dealer, firearms manufacturer, and ammunition vendor to register with the department for a certificate
  • -provide procedures for the issuance, revocation, and reinstatement of a permit

California communist flag goes along with a new gun tax law

Newsom Thinks Owning a Gun is a Sin, and deserves a “Sin Tax”

The term “sin tax” is typically used to discourage certain behaviors or activities that are deemed socially undesirable, such as smoking or excessive alcohol consumption. However, it’s important to recognize that owning a firearm is a constitutional right protected by the Second Amendment.

Check out KSG Armory’s affordable holsters.

Applying a sin tax to firearms implies that gun ownership is inherently sinful or undesirable, which undermines the principles of our nation. It is a disservice to the millions of law-abiding citizens who exercise their right to bear arms responsibly and for legitimate reasons such as self-defense, hunting, and sport shooting.

A Burden on Law-Abiding Citizens

Newsom’s proposed gun tax unfairly targets law-abiding citizens. By imposing additional financial burdens on those who seek to exercise their Second Amendment rights, this policy creates an unnecessary obstacle for individuals who follow the law.

Criminals steal the vast majority of guns they use in crimes. This “sin tax” does not affect these criminals, only law-abiding citizens.

Furthermore, a tax like this disproportionately impacts lower-income individuals who struggle to afford the additional costs associated with gun ownership. This regressive approach contradicts the goal of ensuring equal access to self-defense for all citizens, regardless of their economic status.

Thanks to the Craiyon website for generating this image of California’s destructive leader, Governor Newsom.

An Ineffective Solution to Gun Violence

Advocates of the gun tax argue that it will generate revenue to fund programs aimed at reducing gun violence. While this may sound appealing in theory, it’s important to scrutinize the effectiveness of such a claim.

I recently wrote on how gun control advocates use the term “gun violence” deceptively to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Understanding Gun Violence: Numbers, Context, and Solutions

Government Programs, Doomed to Fail-

Anyone who thinks “government programs” to study or reduce gun violence is sadly nieve. No matter how much money they throw at the problem of violence, it will fail because the progressive leaders in California don’t want to address violence. They just want to disarm their constituents. In this respect, they have been effective.

I am convinced that these programs will funnel a lot of money to bogus organizations run by friends and associates of California lawmakers, and do nothing to focus any real help to fix mental health, or address the lawlessness and broken California criminal justice system that encourages crime.

Finally

If you want to read the entire bill, you can do so here.

While the goal of reducing gun violence is undoubtedly a noble one, Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposed gun tax is evil, misguided and counterproductive approach. For a leader to purposefully make the people they govern more vulnerable to criminals, while encouraging those criminals, is not just wrong, but it is evil.

I moved out of California in 2014, and I am so glad I did. I wonder how much longer will Californian’s put up with this type of garbage.

California Assembly Bill 28 unfairly targets law-abiding citizens, places an undue financial burden on those with limited means, and ultimately does nothing root causes of gun violence.

About Matthew Maruster

I follow my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who is the eternal co-equal Son of God. I currently live in Columbus, Ohio with my wife and daughter. I served in the Marine Corps Infantry. I was a Staff Sergeant and served as a Platoon Sergeant during combat in Iraq. After I was a police officer at a municipal agency in San Diego County. I have a Bachelors’s Degree in Criminal Justice from National University. I produce the Concealed Carry Podcast and coordinate the Concealed Carry Instructor Network, and manage MJ Maruster Defense.

Categories
Born again Cynic!

And my lovely wife still cannot understand on why I don’t trust the mainstream media

Categories
Born again Cynic! California Paint me surprised by this

California enacts first gun and ammunition tax in the country

California enacts first statewide gun and ammunition tax in the country

————————————————————————————-

California: “Yes, the Second Amendment affirms your Right to keep and bear arms, but we’re going to make sure you can’t afford it, nor are you going to be able to afford ammunition to learn to shoot safely.”

Categories
Allies Born again Cynic!

Exclusive: AG Jeff Landry Says Louisiana Will Adopt Constitutional Carry When He’s Governor by AWR HAWKINS

Attorney General Jeff Landry (R) discussed his run for Governor of Louisiana with Breitbart News and affirmed constitutional carry will finally be secured once he is in the gubernatorial office.

As we talked, constitutional carry was the first topic that came up. Recent history has shown constitutional carry has the overwhelming support of the Louisiana legislature but is opposed by the state’s current governor, John Bel Edwards (D).

In fact, the Associated Press reported that Edwards vetoed constitutional carry legislation on June 25, 2021.

Landry sees it differently. He does not believe Louisiana residents need a permit from the government in order to participate in Second Amendment freedoms.

Jeff Landry, attorney general of Louisiana, during a Weaponization of the Federal Government Subcommittee hearing in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, March 30, 2023. (Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg via Getty)

He said, “The current Gov. of this state has vetoed constitutional carry but we’re going in and passing that.”

Landry focused on how criminals are armed, whether permits are required or not, and he observed, “The problems are not the guns, the problems are cultural. The problems are broken families, the problems are poor educational opportunities, the problems are not supporting programs that teach the proper use and handling of firearms.”

He observed, “Those that blame the gun are the first ones that would put an iPhone in a kid’s hand rather than give him love and guidance.”

Landry summed up his views on constitutional carry by pointing out, “I support further strengthening the right of our citizens, their ability to exercise the Second Amendment of the constitution, and I will be focused on any way that we can strengthen that at the state level.”

The NRA has endorsed Landry in the upcoming Louisiana gubernatorial election:

Landry spoke to Breitbart News about the endorsement, saying that the day they endorsed him was “one of the proudest days of [his] life.”

He added, “I’m a lifetime member of the NRA and I believe in the mission. Look, we’ve got a number of gun rights organizations out there, and the NRA’s been the leader in that space. and to have their endorsement speaks volumes about my record defending the Second Amendment.”

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio and a Turning Point USA Ambassador. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal in 2010, a speaker at the 2023 Western Conservative Summit, and he holds a Ph.D. in Military History, with a focus on the Vietnam War (brown water navy), U.S. Navy since Inception, the Civil War, and Early Modern Europe. Follow him on Instagram: @awr_hawkins. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

Categories
Born again Cynic! Paint me surprised by this

NY AG Seeks Supplemental Deposition From Willes Lee by John Richardson

By tradition, Willes Lee should have been the next President of the NRA. Instead, Charles Cotton was given a third term and Willes was replaced as 1st Vice President by Bob Barr.

As one might imagine, this did not sit well with Willes. He had been a loyal supporter of the existing regime within the NRA for four years as 1st and 2nd Vice President, had served as the attack dog for the powers that be, had supported the abortive bankruptcy filing as a member of the Special Litigation Committee, and the list goes on.

Not only had he been blindsided by the move to keep Cotton as President for a third term but he only found out he was being ousted as an officer when the Nominating Committee report was slipped under his door.

Since his ouster, Willes has take to social media to give his side of the story as well as make teasing remarks about what really was going on. His posts have appeared on Facebook, X as Twitter is now called, and Instagram. I, like others such as NRA In Danger, have been following his posts on an almost daily basis. It was like watching a train wreck and you can’t look away.

You know who else was following his posts on Facebook? The New York Attorney General’s Office and now they want to know more. Yesterday, they filed a motion to compel the “post-note of issue supplemental deposition” of him. The motion makes note of his Facebook postings and how they seem to be at odds with his prior testimony before the US Bankruptcy Court and in his deposition in the New York case. Alexander Mendelson, Assistant Attorney General (of New York), argues that “unusual and unanticipated circumstances” allow a supplemental deposition even though the time for deposition of witnesses has nominally closed.

The circumstances that Mendelson refers to are Willes’ Facebook posts and his ouster as an officer. It is argued that this supplemental deposition can be done before the beginning of the trial and this would be better than wasting time on an exhaustive cross-examination during the trial itself.

If Judge Cohen approves this motion and I have no reason to believe he won’t, it is going to get interesting. For example, you have Willes complaining about being left off of committees while at the same testifying in his deposition that it was OK for Tim Knight, Esther Schneider, and Sean Maloney to be excluded. Moreover, given the numerous posts complaining about Charles Cotton and David Coy and their roles as heads of the Audit and Finance Committees, you can be sure that his questioners are going to be digging deeper. I just wonder how much that the NRA’s attorneys will be able to prevent from being on the record.

There is a great lesson here for all of us. Don’t put stuff out on social media and expect it to stay private. What you say there lives forever and it will come back to bite you at the worst possible time. As for Willes who normally has multiple daily posts on Facebook, Instagram, and X, he has gone silent since yesterday. Frankly, I’m glad he hasn’t been silent in the past as his comments will force the truth to come to light.

Categories
Born again Cynic! Dear Grumpy Advice on Teaching in Today's Classroom Some Red Hot Gospel there! You have to be kidding, right!?!

George Washington’s Outrageous Bar Tab

https://youtu.be/wM3iB0i2Crs

The Whiskey Rebellion

Whiskey Rebellion
Aaron Kendeall

by Aaron Kendeall

What Was the Whiskey Rebellion?

In the 18th century, a new nation was recovering from its War of Independence. The economy was in shambles. And, subsequently, so were the drinking habits of citizens across the fledgling United States of America.

During the colonial era, American whiskey was considered a low-brow tipple, one relegated to mountain folk of the frontier beyond population centers along the East Coast. But following the Revolutionary War, whiskey was thrust into the forefront of the American experiment—causing an early confrontation whose reverberations continue to be felt today.

In this article, we’ll see how these factors led to the event known as the Whiskey Rebellion. And we’ll see how the spirit at the heart of this conflict—Monongahela Rye—was an early predecessor of today’s Bourbon and American Rye whiskeys and how innovative craft whiskey makers are bringing back this historical spirit and leading a renaissance in an emerging whiskey sub-category.

Background & History

Following the end of the American War for Independence, the newly established Treasury Department—led by Alexander Hamilton—was broke. During the war, the national government—an alliance of states loosely bound by the Articles of Confederation—was unable to levy taxes. As a result, it racked up $75 million in debt.

Simultaneously, America’s relationship with drinks was being altered by divergent forces.

First, the production of Rum was disrupted by the war. The import of finished drinks like European wine and French cognac ceased, as did trade with the British islands that supplied the molasses the Atlantic coast distilleries used to make Rum were wiped out by British embargoes. Import duties caused prices to soar. Suddenly, the favorite tipples of those living in the wealthy and influential population centers along the Atlantic Coast were wiped out.

whiskey loaded for transport to philadelphiav3
Settlers loading whiskey and other goods for transport to cities back east, including Philadelphia. Photo by Aaron Kendeall for Gentlemen Ranters. Courtesy Whiskey Rebellion History Center.

So, the young nation turned to the whiskey that was already wildly popular in the Allegheny highlands to fill its demand. The Founding Fathers were quite philosophical about this endeavor.

A domestic drinks industry was needed to fill the gap and liberate Americans from the tariffs of foreign wines and spirits. Whiskey could be made from plentiful crops harvested domestically without any foreign inputs. And federal officials could tax production to help lower the national debt.

George Washington’s stance was so enthusiastic that he began distilling whiskey at his property at Mount Vernon – becoming the largest whiskey distiller in the United States by his death in 1799.

What Was the Root Cause of the Whiskey Rebellion?

A group was considerably less enthused about the idea of an excise tax on distilled spirits production – the western farmers along the frontier of the new nation. Those centered around the hamlets that dotted the Monongahela River valley as it meandered along the banks of Washington County and Allegheny County while flowing north towards Pittsburgh to meet the Allegheny River and form the Ohio River were especially adamant. Surrounding areas, including Fayette County, Westmoreland County and Bedford County, were also involved.

When congress authorized the newly-established federal authority of the treasury department to enact an Excise Whiskey Tax in 1791—the first such tax levied by the new national government—on whiskey production, farmers in these western counties protested the tax. The ensuing conflict became known as the ‘Whiskey Rebellion.’

Who Were the Whiskey Rebels? And Who Were They Rebelling Against?

Let’s stage the stage.

Like a Shakespeare play, the drama about to unfold is best told with an introduction to our cast of characters.

We should emphasize this was a civil dispute—a conflagration that unfolded as a battle between the new federal government, militia forces and mountain distillers who sought to protect their most important source of revenue. And like most civil disputes, it pitted neighbors and family members against each other. Both sides were ranked with a significant number of Revolutionary War veterans.

As we will learn, the lines drawn between these dynamic forces were quite blurred. But we can draw distinctions where applicable.

John Neville – Brigadier General and veteran of the Revolutionary War. He was appointed Inspector of Revenue by President George Washington for the district that included Western Pennsylvania.

John Adams – Vice President of the United States during the Whiskey Rebellion.

George Washington – First President of the United States. He was in office during the Whiskey Rebellion. George Washington’s Mount Vernon estate later featured the country’s largest distillery.

James Madison – Founding Father and later President of the United States. A shrewd Anti-Federalist politician, he argued for the right of the rebels to plead their case in the court of public opinion.

James McFarlane – Earned the rank of Major during the Revolutionary War. He was a leader of Whiskey Rebellion forces and was killed in the exchange of gunfire at Neville’s property.

‘Light Horse Harry’ Henry Lee III – Revolutionary War Hero, Lee was a cavalry commander during the Revolutionary War. He was summoned by the president to lead roughly 13,000 federal troops to put down the rebellion. Ironically, his son—Robert E. Lee—would later lead the Army of Northern Virginia against federal troops during the American Civil War.

James Ross – Pennsylvania politician and member of Pennsylvania’s Constitutional Convention. Ross was chosen by President Washington to negotiate with the rebels and diffuse the situation.

William Findley – An Anti-Federalist, Findley nonetheless helped to calm the situation and acted as an arbiter between the rebels and the government.

David Bradford – Whiskey Rebel and distiller, attorney and shipping magnate. A Revolutionary War veteran, he was among the wealthiest men on the Western frontier.

Hugh Henry Brackenridge – A Pennsylvania lawyer and moderate, he tried to position both sides to calm, earning the dislike of all.

Whiskey Boys – This group vehemently opposed taxation and harassed federal revenue officers and any distillers they saw as bowing to law enforcement.

Alexander Hamilton – Secretary of the Treasury, he directed federal officials to collect taxes from distillers and personally led the forces to put down the rebellion.

Thomas Jefferson – Founding Father and third President of the U.S., he politician whose stance on personal liberty helped motivate the rebels.

Albert Gallatin – A calm-headed statesman and member of the Friends of Order, he opposed the tax. But Albert Gallatin’s level-headed pragmatism was credited with avoiding additional bloodshed.

Tom the Tinker – Whiskey Boys organizer and agitator who signed anonymous threatening letters to distillers who cooperated with the law. Often, stills that ignored these pleas might’ve found their equipment ruined.

As the two camps of distillers broke into factions, the Friends of Liberty were the rebels, and the Friends of Order sided with maintaining order. And the Federalist wing of government sought to execute their power to repay America’s war debt, eventually mustering armed forces to put down the rebellion.

Why Was Monongahela Rye Whiskey Crucial to the Economy?

The Monongahela River Valley played an essential role in forming what is now recognized as American whiskey.

Before Bourbon was a county—or Kentucky a state—farmers in the western counties that formed the new nation’s frontier used excess grain from their harvests to produce whiskey. Throughout the Allegheny Mountains—a natural boundary preventing westward expansion—distillers turned this grain into whiskey, a shelf-stable product that would not spoil and could even improve with age.

In a time before refrigeration, we cannot emphasize the importance of a product that could preserve surplus grain yields. In fact, throughout these frontier counties, folks utilized whiskey as a currency where paper notes and coins were scarce.

The whiskey produced on the Pennsylvania frontier was colloquially known as ‘Monongahela Rye.’

To learn more about this aspect of the story, we traveled to the Bradford House and Whiskey Rebellion History museums in Washington, Pennsylvania. There, Bradford House Head Docent Dave Budinger helped explain the importance of whiskey production in the local economy.

20230202 110027 edited scaled
The Bradford House Museum in Washington, PA. Photo by Aaron Kendeall for Gentlemen Ranters.

Dave is a fantastic storyteller—we really recommend visiting the museum if you ever find yourself in the Pittsburgh area and want to explore the growing Monongahela Whiskey trail. We will let him pick up this part of the story and explain how David Bradford fits into the big picture.

“[David Bradford] had a distillery, he had a grist mill, and he had a sawmill,” Dave said. “And he owned great tracts of land in the area. There, he distilled his whiskey and probably a lot of other people’s whiskey.

“These farmers had individual stills, and maybe one still would serve about five or six individual families here. People would send their grain to the nearest gristmill, which would grind it and prepare it. Some of the ground grains would become flour, which would be shipped—apparently, wheat doesn’t grow quite well in New Orleans.

“So, flour was a very important product,” Dave said. Goods would travel down the Monongahela River to the Ohio River and then the Mississippi River, eventually making its way to the port of New Orleans.

On the frontier, whiskey wasn’t just an essential part of the economy—in many ways, it was the economy. Because of the distance from banking institutions, access to currency was often nonexistent.

“That’s why it was so important out here,” Dave said. “This was their cash. And for this new upstart federal government to tax their only way to make any cash out here really upset the hell out of them—enough to pick up a musket and do something about it.”

An essential piece of Bradford’s role in the whiskey economy dealt with his shipping interests. He organized the pack trains of horses that served as the main avenue of the trade from the western frontier east to Philadelphia and the Atlantic Coast.

“This is before there were any decent roads over the mountains, so they had to ship things by horseback for the most part,” Dave said. “Farmers would get together and build these long trains of horses, ship their goods over and cross their fingers they didn’t lose too much. And Monongahela Rye was very sought after on the other side of the mountains. We had some very good distillers here.”

Whiskey was the most critical commodity being transported east from Western Pennsylvania.

“They couldn’t make money shipping their grain across the mountains because it’s too bulky,” Dave said. “You could have a horse carry four bushels of grain, but if you distill that grain into whiskey, a horse could carry the equivalent of 24 bushels of grain over the mountains,” Dave said. And whiskey was much more valuable than grain, earning more profits per pound of cargo.

At this point in history, most whiskey would be consumed as a white, unaged spirit—days or weeks after coming off the still. But, as we mentioned in our previous What is Bourbon? post, transportation of whiskey down the Ohio and Mississippi rivers to New Orleans led to important discoveries in the art of maturation. The earliest of these shipments would’ve been Monongahela Rye.

But similar magic happened in the barrel on the road east to Philadelphia. Thanks to the jostling of the liquid over the rugged mountain paths, agitation might have created intriguing flavor characteristics. So, in addition to today’s mandated American oak barrels, used charred and uncharred oak barrels would’ve been used, along with wood like chestnut, maple and hickory—barrels that might be considered exotic wood by today’s distillers.

Monongahela Whiskey was perfectly placed for distribution.

In addition to river route to market—the Monongahela meets with the Allegheny River in Pittsburgh to form the Ohio River—an overland route was available east to Philadelphia, which at the time was the capital of the United States and one of the largest markets in the country. The wooden barrels that served as shipping vessels also imparted flavors on the overland route, and the jostling of the horse-drawn wagons over rugged mountain trails might’ve helped distillers understand the improvements offered by wood maturation.

What Was the Whiskey Rebellion? And How Did It Play Out?

The Excise Tax on distilled spirits disrupted production not only in the frontier settlements in Western Pennsylvania, but across the newly formed United States.

Many Revolutionary War veterans—including some Scots with a generational view of avoiding any tax on whiskey from the King’s exchequer—abhorred the the idea of federal officials coming after their primary means of income.

Poor farmers who distilled to monetize their excess harvest across the country fomented opposition to the tax. In North Carolina, a sizeable population of distillers opposed the tax and began illicit distillations. In Kentucky, Maryland, South Carolina and what is now West Virginia and Ohio and throughout the Appalachian Mountains chain, distillers raised opposition and fought tax collectors.

But we will focus on a group along the Monongahela River Valley in Pennsylvania near the town named Washington to honor the first president of the newly formed nation.

The Whiskey Excise Act, known as the ‘Whiskey Tax,’ was the country’s first excise tax. It was enacted in March 1791.

After petitioning unsuccessfully against the tax, farmers grew increasingly frustrated. In September of that year, a tax inspector was tarred and feathered. Tensions continued to mount as the government looked to enforce its tax, and local distillers were split into camps based on whether they fought the tax. Finally, a whiskey tax collector was attacked at Pigeon Creek. The idea of violent resistance and declaring independence from the United States grew.

In July 1794,  the Battle of Bower Hill occurred in which about 600 whiskey rebels led by Major James McFarlane surrounded the house of revenue collector General John Neville. During the struggle, McFarlane received a fatal gunshot, and several other participants were injured and killed before Neville’s house was burned to the ground.

Enraged by the death of McFarlane, the rebels met at Braddock’s Field near Pittsburgh. About 7,000 people marched through the streets of Pittsburgh, terrorizing residents until the situation was diffused.

What Was the Whiskey Rebellion Flag?

A short discussion of vexillology…

The flags the rebels carried varied, but often had seven stripes—four red and three white—one for each of the counties represented at Braddock’s Field— Allegheny, Fayette, Washington, Bedford, Westmoreland and Ohio and Monongalia counties, which are in modern-day West Virginia. Simple flags were often hung from liberty poles to show solidarity with those fighting for independence. Often, they carried an inscription with the words ‘no excise.’

flag side by side example
Examples of the federal standard, left, and the striped insurrection flags, both from the Whiskey Rebellion museum. Photo by Aaron Kendeall.

A second flag has caused some disagreement.

The flag depicts an eagle on a field of blue and 13 white stars—representing the original 13 colonies. It is often described as a Whiskey Rebel flag, but recently historians have suggested it may have been flown by the troops mustered by the federal government because of its similarity to federal standards of the day.

Monongahela Rye Production Techniques

In future posts, we will dive more in depth into the production techniques of historical distillers, as well as how today’s producers are paying homage to that legacy when producing today’s top brands. But for now, check out this video of the historical diorama that is on display at the Whiskey Rebellion History Center in Washington, Pennsylvania.

Video by Aaron Kendeall for Gentlemen Ranters.

Monongahela Rye in Today’s Marketplace

We must make a distinction between the Straight Rye whiskey customers are familiar with in today’s marketplace. Today, American Rye whiskey must be made from a mash bill of at least 51% rye grain. But as we noted in previous posts about the history of Canadian Whisky, the Scottish distillers who were more accustomed to using malted barley as the primary grain of their wort started utilizing the hearty rye grain that thrived in colder climates along the frontier and used the term to describe varying amounts of the grain in their distillates. So the rye content in Monongahela Rye historically would’ve varied from still to still and from batch to batch depending on each year’s yield and what remained from the harvest after being sold on the commodities market.

Popular Monongahela Rye and Pennsylvania Whiskey Brands

While only the tip of the iceberg, here are three brands that will help you start your journey to learn more about the Monongahela Rye category.

Wigle Whiskey – Named after Philip Vigol, an anglicized spelling of the German Wigle, this brand is produced in Pittsburgh and makes Rye whiskey along with a panoply of distilled spirits, liqueurs and ready-to-drink beverages. Note: The author worked as a distiller and brand ambassador for Wigle before its acquisition by Highland Ventures.

Liberty Pole – Located a few blocks away from the historic Bradford House, Liberty Pole was founded by the passionate Hough family. They utilize local grains to make authentic Monongahela Rye style whiskey—along with bourbon, bourbon cream liqueur, corn whiskey and other distilled spirits.

Stoll & Wolf – Old meets new in an innovative whiskey brand that honors the past. The distillery is on the site of the old Bomberger’s Distillery in Schaefferstown, Pennsylvania, which was founded in 1753 and boasts the distinction as the oldest distillery in the United States. It was the original production site of the Michter’’’s brand and when it shut down in 1989, Dick Stoll had been one of the last old-school producers to make Pennsylvania Rye. Along with partner Eric Wolfe and his wife Avianna, they resurrected the historic brand and were among the first to distil using historic methods at the reconstructed distillery at George Washington’s Mt. Vernon home.

Ponfeigh Distillery – Once up and running later this year, the continuous column still at Ponfeigh will have the capacity of 3,000 barrels per year. Focusing on Monongahela Rye, this project is another indication that volume distilling is returning to Western Pennsylvania.

Bibliography & Additional Resources

Below are some great titles that will help you dive deeper into this important historical episode in which the American Government first met armed resistance to its Constitutional powers.

  • “The Whiskey Rebellion” by William Hogeland. Simon & Schuster, 2006.
  • “The Whiskey Rebellion: Frontier Epilogue to the American Revolution” by Thomas P. Slaughter. Oxford University Press, 1986.
  • Brackenridge, Hugh Henry (1795). Incidents of the Insurrection in Western Pennsylvania in the Year 1794. Philadelphia: Printed and sold by John M’Culloch.
  • “The Alcoholic Republic: An American Tradition” by W.J. Rorabaugh. Oxford University Press, 1979.

Thanks to Dave Budinger, Tracie Liberatore and Denise Cummins at the Bradford House Museum for their help in writing this article.

Categories
Another potential ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE Born again Cynic!

NRA’s Mystery Case Revealed

by 

First, there was a post in The Trace referring to a sealed case involving the NRA and its longtime advertising firm Ackerman McQueen. It turns out all we knew is that the NRA has subpoenaed Tony Makris’ wife Elicia Warner Loughlin. She went to US District Court in South Carolina to quash the subpoena as being “burdensome”. It should be noted at this time that the NRA has settled with Ackerman McQueen for $12 million. Further, Makris’ Under Wild Skies won a judgement for $500,000 +/- in Virginia state courts against the NRA.

Next, the blog NRA In Danger reported on another move to squash a subpoena issued by the NRA. This time it was Makris who went to US District Court in Virginia to squash it. That subpoena had been issued to his CPA firm of Fitzwater and Dean. On August 18th, Magistrate Judge John Anderson ruled in favor of quashing the subpoena. He said it was overbroad, would impose an undue burden, not timely, and that the information could be obtained elsewhere. He also refused to transfer the case to the US District Court in Texas. Judge Anderson did allow the discovery order to remain sealed pending orders from the court in Texas.

Thanks to Judge A. Joe Fish of the US District Court for Northern Texas unsealing the majority of the case on August 25th, we finally have an answer.

The NRA sued Ackerman McQueen and the Mercury Group for breach of contract on September 1, 2022. The complaint which was filed under seal alleges Ack Mac and the Mercury Group violated the terms of the Confidential Settlement Agreement (CSA) because Makris and Under Wild Skies was suing the NRA in Virginia state court. They contend that UWS was an affiliate company and that suit violated the $12 million settlement which was “a broad, mutual general release of all claims (the “Release”) among the parties and their affiliates and/or related companies.”

The complaint goes on to argue that since Tony Makris was a senior executive of Ack Mac and President of Mercury Group, he and Under Wild Skies were precluded from suing the NRA in state court as they were “intertwined” and thus bound by the CSA. AckMac and the Mercury Group are included this suit because they failed to “cooperate in the dismissal of the UWS litigation.” The NRA does acknowledge later in the complaint that UWS is an entity that is solely owned by Tony Makris and is a Virginia corporation.

What is ironic here is the claim by the NRA (or should I say Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors) that they only sued AckMac, the Mercury Group, and Under Wild Skies initially so that they could do their due diligence and comply with concerns of New York regulators.

The NRA is asking for damages in excess of $75,000, attorneys’ fees in both this and the UWS cases, and reimbursement with interest of the damages awarded by the Virginia court.

In response to the NRA’s allegations, AckMac and the Mercury Group acknowledge the CSA, the litigation in Virginia by UWS, and that Tony Makris is an officer of both AckMac and Mercury. There is stops. They say that Under Wild Skies is not an affiliate or related entity of either company. They deny UWS was bound by the CSA. They also say the lawsuit is moot because the Virginia court found UWS was not bound by the CSA and that a jury awarded UWS $550,000 in damages. It is also contended that this lawsuit is “collaterally estopped” due to the rulings of the Virginia court which disposed of the NRA’s argument that the CSA included Under Wild Skies. Given that, this argument cannot be raised again.

Later filings added Tony Makris personally as a defendant in the case. His brief for summary judgement filed in May 2023 argues that he was never a named party to the CSA. Further, that he individually was not a party to the litigation in Virginia between Under Wild Skies and the NRA. It was the corporation that sued the NRA and not Makris personally. He also argues that he was a beneficiary of the CSA and cannot be sued as it granted release from any liability, damages, etc “from the beginning of the world until the date of this release.” Included in that release were all “Ackerman parties” which included any past, present, or future officer, director, shareholder, principal, etc. of Ackerman McQueen and Mercury Group. The NRA explicitly has said that Makris was an officer and executive and thus he personally would be covered by the CSA.

I don’t know how this case will be resolved. However, given there are 171 entries in the docket, attorneys have come and gone from Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors, and there is a lot of back and forth on what can be introduced as evidence or what can be sealed, I think the real winners in this case will be the attorneys.

For the life of me, I cannot see what financial benefit will accrue to the NRA given the legal bills involved in trying to claw back the $550,000 paid to Under Wild Skies and perhaps some of the $12 million in the CSA with AckMac and Mercury Group. I don’t know if the Special Litigation Committee was involved in approving this lawsuit or if the Board was even informed. Regardless, this lawsuit seems more akin to the lawsuit that cost $8 million in legal fees so the NRA could avoid paying Chris Cox the $2 million in severance due him. They lost that case by the way. It just seems a frivolous waste of members’ dues that could have gone to more important things. You know like actually defending the Second Amendment against the predations of the Biden Administration.

Categories
Another potential ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE Born again Cynic! Grumpy's hall of Shame Some Red Hot Gospel there!

From only guns and money – A Multitude Of Liberty Safe Memes

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! California Grumpy's hall of Shame Gun Fearing Wussies You have to be kidding, right!?!

California Democrats pass state tax on guns and ammunition after nearly a decade of attempts by Lindsey Holden

Taya Gray/USA TODAY NETWORK file

California lawmakers will send a state excise tax on guns and ammunition to Gov. Gavin Newsom after years of failed attempts by Democratic legislators.

The Senate voted 27-9 on Thursday to approve Assembly Bill 28, which would require manufacturers, vendors and dealers to pay an 11% tax on guns and ammunition to fund violence prevention efforts. The bill passed with exactly the two-thirds threshold needed for approval of a tax.

Gun and ammunition-sellers would pay the new state tax on top of the 10 to 11% federal excise tax they already pay to fund wildlife conservation efforts.

Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, D-Woodland Hills, authored the bill after former Assemblyman Marc Levine, D-San Rafael, failed multiple times to get excise tax bills through the Legislature.

Prior to Levine’s attempts, at least three other lawmakers had pushed similar taxes on guns and ammunition since 2013. Gabriel’s bill was the first of its kind to pass out of the Assembly.

When the assemblyman first put the bill forward, there were questions about whether it was “in the realm of possibility,” he said after the Senate vote.

“I introduced this bill at the very beginning of session,” Gabriel said. “A few weeks later, we have mass shootings in Half Moon Bay and in Monterey Park and in all these places.”

“Frankly, I think part of the reason the bill passed is the public is demanding this of us,” he added. “They are demanding that we have more solutions that will do more to protect their kids, to protect their communities.”

Lawmakers debate tax effectiveness

Many senators on Thursday cited their children and grandchildren and school safety concerns in their arguments for backing the bill. Floor debate lasted for about an hour before lawmakers voted.

Sen. Angelique Ashby, D-Sacramento, urged her colleagues to support AB 28 as a “mechanism to address gun violence.” She made her plea in the name of her school-age daughter and California children, as well as Amber Clark, a Natomas librarian who was fatally shot in 2018.

“Like so many Americans, I do hug my little daughter each morning as I drop her off at school,” Ashby said. “And as I drive away, I push out of my mind the unthinkable. Otherwise, it would be impossible for me to face the tasks I’m responsible for every day.”

But Republicans, and a handful of Democrats, said the tax would do little to prevent gun violence, and retailers would pass on the added cost on to customers. In this way, it would penalize law-abiding firearm owners, hunters and students taking part in shooting sports, they said.

“When you add another 11% on, all it’s going do is decrease the number of hunters,” said Sen. Bill Dodd, D-Napa. “Sooner or later, this will be like the tobacco tax. And sooner or later, this money’s going to go down, down, down.”

Gun control groups cheered AB 28’s passage and urged Newsom to sign it.

“This bill is an innovative approach in tackling gun violence and a crucial step to improve the safety of all California families,” said Cassandra Whetstone, a volunteer with the California chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, in a statement.

Gun rights advocates said they plan to sue the state over the legislation if the governor makes it law.

“The passage of this bill will be seen for what it is … an unconstitutional tax on an enumerated right,” said Rick Travis, legislative director for the California Rifle and Pistol Association, in an email.

The measure now heads to Newsom, who must sign or veto bills by Oct. 14.

(Yup, you read that right – California is going to tax one of our Constitutionally protected Rights.)

Categories
Born again Cynic! Well I thought it was funny!

How my Funeral will probably be like!


Now here is how I would REALLY want my funeral to be like! GrumpyRelated image