Proof That Hillary Does Want To Make The Second Amendment MeaninglessAccording to The Washington Post, we are supposed to forget that in the early autumn of 2015 Hillary Clinton said the Supreme Court got it “wrong on the Second Amendment.” In point of fact, we weren’t even supposed to hear her say this. Someone leaked an audio recording from a private fundraiser hosted in Greenwich Village. Better known as “the Village” in New York City, this is an upscale neighborhood on the west side of Lower Manhattan known for being stuffed with wealthy, liberal-progressives. It is a place where President Barack Obama and Hillary have gone, again and again, to raise money for their campaigns.
When Hillary said this, she was at the home of John Zaccaro, who is the widower of the late Geraldine Ferraro. Ferraro was a congresswoman and, in 1984, the Democratic Party’s vice-presidential nominee. On the recording you can hear these wealthy and/or connected people applaud after Hillary says, “I was proud when my husband took [the National Rifle Association] on, and we were able to ban assault weapons, but he had to put a sunset on so 10 years later. Of course [President George W.] Bush wouldn’t agree to reinstate them…. And here again, the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.”
Instead of making the “case every chance” she gets, we are now supposed to forget we heard her say this, says the mainstream media and Clinton-supporting pundits. They say Hillary doesn’t really want to nominate U.S. Supreme Court justices who would reverse District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and thereby drain the life out of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights. They say you are a conspiracy theorist if you say as much.
An article in The Washington Post last May titled “Hillary Clinton doesn’t want to repeal the 2nd Amendment. But in 1991, George Will did.” began by saying, “No stranger to exaggeration, well-coiffed billionaire Donald Trump told an audience at a National Rifle Association event that his likely general election opponent Hillary Clinton planned to ‘abolish the Second Amendment’ to the Constitution. There’s no truth to that claim, as has been noted repeatedly—and as Clinton herself had noted in a tweet.”
The Washington Post repeated this claim again this week with an op-ed titled “No, Hillary Clinton does not want to ‘abolish’ the Second Amendment.”
They say this even though Hillary Clinton said the Supreme Court got it “wrong on the Second Amendment.” When she said this Hillary must have been talking about the Heller and McDonald (2010) decisions. Both were 5-4 rulings by the Supreme Court. In Heller, the Court determined that the Second Amendment is indeed an individual right. In McDonald, the Court ruled that the individual right to bear arms also restricts state and local governments (not just the federal government). If Hillary thinks the high court got it wrong on these basic questions about the U.S. Bill of Rights, then she clearly would nominate Supreme Court justices who would agree with the minority opinions in both of those rulings. Both of those minority opinions argued vociferously that there is no individual right to bear arms. If a future Supreme Court rules that way then the Second Amendment will be gutted of meaning, or as Donald Trump says, “Abolished.”
Sure, more recently, at the Democratic National Convention, Hillary said, “I’m not here to repeal the Second Amendment. I’m not here to take away your guns.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2016/08/11/proof-that-hillary-does-want-to-make-the-second-amendment-meaningless/#6d6734f84365
